The URL can be used to link to this page

01/25/1999 - 4639€ OFFICIAL CITY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25,1999 � � unror FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ATTENDENCE SHEET Mav�day, Januatcy 25, 1999 7:30 P.M. PLEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PPRINT_NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS ITEM NUMBER � ) ` � . , �lf v`� v�� f ` ,��-�� , �,u� � �- �u�� 6:P a� ��=� � _ � � .�-�c� � �{� /q9�. � u�-Q- � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 1999C�_ w' � � � vrc�,. The City of Fridley will not discriminate against or hazass anyone in the admission or access to, or treatment, or employment� in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of January 4, 1999 ��i i /� ! / / APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS: Receive the Planning Commission Minutes of January 6, 1999 ............ 1.01 - 1.12 Replat, P.S. #98-04, by N.G. Nelson, Onan Corporation, to Replat Property to Accommodate the Development of a Warehousing Facility, Generally Located at 1400 - 73�' Avenue N.E. (Ward 3) ................................... 2.01 - 2.20 ��t �°� t�%' " !��}" , �'' � �� APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUEDt: Receive Proposals and Award Contract for Curbside Recycling Services .......... 5.01 - 5.03 Approve Change Order No. 3 for the Fridley Community Center Lower Level Project No. 319 ................................... 6.01 - 6.03 Receive Bid and Award Contract for Upgrade of the City of Fridley's Water and Sewer SCADA System Upgrade ............... 7.01 - 7.07 � ��-� �l f� Approve Memorandum of Understanding with the Anoka County Conservation District for Wetland Conservation Act Reimbursement .............................. 8.01 - 8.03 Replat, P.S. #98-05, by Dave Carland, CSM Properties, Inc., to Replat Property for the Development of Vacant Land, Generally Located on Northco Drive and 73rd Avenue N.E. (Ward 1) ............. 3.01 - 3.12 �- �� f' �'l G'7�') .�� - �� Variance Request, VAR #98-40, by Willard and Donna Johnson, to Allow the Storage of a Travel Trailer on a Blacktop Driveway in the Front Yard Rather than in the Side or Rear Yard, Generally Located at 560 Fairmont Street N.E. (Ward 3) ....................... 4.01 - 4.15 (��f�V L (� - ,��.�c- � �i"r�m ��4 Resolution Ordering Imp�ovement, Approval of Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids: Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1999 -10 (Sealcoat) 9.01 - 9.03 Resolution Ordering Advertisement for Bids: 1999 - Removal and Replacement of Miscellaneous Concrete Curb and Gutter and Sidewalk Project No. 322 ........ 10.01 . 2 � � r FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 1999 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): Resolution Ordering Improvement, Approval of Plans and Ordering Advertisement for Bids: Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair Project No. 320 ............................... 11,01 - 3 Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $2,140,000 in Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Columbia Park Properties) .................................. 12.0 .04 Resolution Authorizing Signing an Agreement for Certain Employees Represented by International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 49, AFL-CIO (Public Works Maintenance) C , for 1999 and 2000 ........................... 13.Oy�o .27 Resolution Authorizing a Change in Mileage Reimbursement Rates for the , 1999 Calendar Year ........................ 14.01 .03 Resolution Appointing a Year 2000 Project Coordinator ................................... 15.0 5.02 Approve Agreement for Legal Services Between the City of Fridley and Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered, and Carl J. Newquist ................................. 16.01 - 6.04 a - m PAGE 2 APPROVAL OFPROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUEDI: Appointment: City Employee .......... 17.01 Claims ............. Licenses 18.01 � ...................... 19.01 - 19.02 � Estimates .................................. 20.01 �'��3,�s;�, _ �, � �/�C��s�n�ue ``� � 2� ,� ADOPTION OF AGENDA. ��,. �� a, .3 �s;�,� �•-�a�-. ,C � �/� OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: (Consideration of Items not on Agenda - 15 Minutes) OLD BUSINESS: Variance Request, VAR #98-34, by Spikers Grille and Beachclub, to Increase the Maximum Height of a Sign to 5 eet, the Maximum Si to 200 e-Pface ree Standing S gn on an Entry Drive, Generally ocated at 7651 Central Avenue N. . (Ward 2) (Tabled January 4, 1999) � �� i �.n ` 21.01 - 21.10 ��u �'V ��'� � � � � . � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 1999 PAGE 3 OLD BUSINESS (CONTINUED): Approve Proposed 1999 Agreement between the City of Fridley and the E.T.C. Fridley Communications Workshop, Incorporated (ETC Channel 33) (Tabled January 4, 1999) ................................. 22.01 - 22.02 NEW BUSINESS: Variance, VAR #98-31, by Mark A. Smith, Money Xchange, to Decrease the Minimum Lot Area from 20,000 Square Feet to 12,991 Square Feet; to Decrease the Minimum Side Yard Setback from 15 Feet to 0 Feet; to Decrease the Minimum Setback for a Hard Surface Area from the Side Lot Line from 5 Feet to 0 Feet; to Decrease the Minimum Setback for a Hard Surface Area from the Street Right-of-Way from 20 Feet to 1.5 Feet, to Allow the Development of a Commercial Site, Generally Located at 6301 Highway 65 N.E. (Ward 2) ............ 23.01 - 23.24 Informal Status Reports ......................... 24.01 ADJOURN. � � CIT1f OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 1999 The City of Fridley will not discriminate against or harass anyone in the admission or access to, or treatment, or employment in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, . accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, . programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) r PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of January 4, 1999 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS: . Receive the Planning Commission Minutes of January 6, 1999 • '• ............................................................ 1 01 1 Replat, P.S. #98-04, by N.G. Nelson, Onan Corporation, to Replat Property to Accommodate the Development of a Warehousing Facility, Generally Located at 1400 - 73`d Avenue N.E. (Ward 3) .................................................................................:..... 2.01 - 2.20 .� FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25_ 19ss o�� APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUEDI• Repiat, P.S. #98-05, by Dave Carland, CSM Properties, Inc., to Replat Property for the Development of Vacant Land, Generally Located on Northco Drive and 73�d Avenue N.E. (Ward 1) ............................................................. 3.01 - 3.12 Variance Request, VAR #98-40, by Wllard and Donna Johnson, to Allow the Storage of a Travel Trailer on a Blacktop Driveway in the Front Yard Rather than in the Side or Rear Yard, Generally Located at 560 Fairmont StreetN.E. (Ward 3) ....................................................................... 4.01 - 4.15 Receive Proposals and Award Contract for Curbside Recycling Services .......................................................... 5.01 - 5.03 Approve Change Order No. 3 for the Fridley Community Center Lower Level Project No. 319 ....................................................................................... 6.01 - 6.03 Receive Bid and Award Contract for Upgrade of the City of Fridley's Water and Sewer SCADA System Upgrade ................................................................ 7.01 - 7.07 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25. 1999 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): Approve Memorandum of Understanding with the Anoka County Conservation District for Wetland Conservation Act Reimbursement.............................................................................. 8.01 - 8.03 Resolution Ordering Improvement, Approval of Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids: Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1999 - 10 (Sealcoat) .............................................. 9.01 - 9.03 Resolution Ordering Advertisement for Bids: 1999 - Removal and Replacement of Miscellaneous Concrete Curb and Gutter and Sidewalk Project No. 322 ...:..................................................... 10.01-10.02 Resolution Ordering Improvement, Approval of Plans and Ordering Advertisement for Bids: Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair ProjectNo. 320 ............................................................................... 11.01 - 11.03 Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $2,140,000 in Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Columbia Park Properties) .................................. 12.01 - 12.04 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 1999 porF e. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED� Resolution Authorizing Signing an Agreement for Certain Employees Represented by International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 49, AFL-CIO (Public Works Maintenance) for1999 and 2000 ........................................................................... 13.01 - 13.27 Resolution Authorizing a Change in Mileage Reimbursement Rates for the 1999 Calendar Year .....� ...........................................:....................... 14.01 - 14.03 Resolution Appointing a Year 2000 Project Coordinator..................................................................................... 15.01 - 15.02 Approve Agreement for Legal Services Between the City of Fridley and Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered, and Carl J. New uist � 16.01 - 16.04 q .............. .................. Appointment: City Employee ........................................................... 17.01 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 1999 PAGE 5 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): Claims....................................................................................... 18.01 Licenses....................................................................................... 19.01 - 19.02 Estimates....................................................................................... 20.01 ADOPTION OF AGENDA. OPEN FORUM. VISITORS: (Consideration of Items not on Agenda - 15 Minutes) OLD BUSINESS: Variance Request, VAR #98-34, by Spikers Grille and Beachclub, to Increase the Maximum Height of a Sign to 50 Feet, the Maximum Size to 200 Feet, and to Place a Free Standing Sign on an Entry Drive, Generally Located at 7651 Central Avenue N.E. (Ward 2) (Tabled January4, 1999) .................................................................................. 21.01 - 21.10 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 1999 PAGE 6 OLD BUSINESS (CONTINUED�• Approve Proposed 1999 Agreement between the City of Fridley and the E.T.C. Fridley Communications Workshop, Incorporated (ETC Channel 33) (Tabled January4, 1999) .................................................................................. 22.01 - 22.02 NEW BUSINESS: Variance, VAR #98-31, by Mark A. Smith, Money Xchange, to Decrease the Minimum Lot Area from 20,000 Square Feet to 12,991 Square Feet; to Decrease the Minimum Side Yard Setback from 15 Feet to 0 Feet; to Decrease the Minimum Setback for a Hard Surface Area from the Side Lot Line from 5 Feet to 0 Feet; to Decrease the Minimum Setback for a Hard Surface Area from the Street Right-of-Way from 20 Feet to 1.5 Feet, to Allow the Development of a Commercial Site, Generally Located at 6301 Highway 65 N.E. (Ward 2) ........................................................... 23.01 - 23.24 InformalStatus Reports ....................................................................... 24.01 ADJOURN. THE MINUTES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4,1999 THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF JANUARY 4. 1999 The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Barnette at 7:30 p.m. . PLEDGE OF ALLEGiANCE: Mayor Pro Tem Barnette led the City Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmember Barnette, Councilmember Billings, Councilmember Schneider, Councilmember Wolfe, and Councilmember Bolkcom MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor Jorgenson APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Snecial Citv Council Meeting of December 14, 1998: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of December 14, 1998 as presented in writing. Seconded by Councilmember Schneider. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, ACTING MAYOR BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE TO ELECTED OFFICIALS: Ms. Deb Skogen, City Clerk, administered the Oath of Office to Richard Wolfe, Ann Bolkcom, and Steve Billings for their new terms as Councilmembers. Mayor Pro Tem Barnette and the Councilmembers took this opportunity to thank Councilmember Schneider for his 22 years of dedicated service to the City of Fridley. They noted that he had been a very valuable peer, and they hoped to carry out the level of commitment that he had shown to the residents of Fridley. They wished him all the best. Councilmembers Bolkcom and Billings thanked the citizens for their support during the past election. They extended their congratulations and welcomed Councilmember Wolfe. Mayor Jorgenson was present at the meeting briefly to extend her sincere appreciation to Councilmember Schneider for all that he had done, noting that he will be greatly missed. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 1999 PAGE 2 Councilmember Schneider stated that the past 22 years have been great for him. He felt the City had a great staii and a great City Council. He said he was looking forward to the future. Councilmember Wolfe briefly introduced family members who were present. He also thanked citizens for their support. He stated that he hoped Councilmember Schneider would still be available to offer support and assistance during the transition. STATE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Senator pon Betzold and House Representative Satveer Chaudhary were present to give Council a brief update on issues that they felt would be discussed and/or acted upon during the upcoming legislative session, which will begin at 12:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 5, 1999. Some issues included discussions on the projected budget surplus, budget funding for area schools, Metropolitan Council, Mass Transit/Commuter Rail, discussions with regard to juvenile offenders who commit serious crimes, lowering of the DWI limits, firefighter training funds, data privacy, education/class size reduction, tax cuts, and removal of the levy limits. Representative Chaudhary noted that a town meeting will be held on Saturday, January 9 at the Columbia Heights Public Library. He encouraged the public to attend to discuss some of the upcoming legislative issues. Mayor Pro Tem Barnette noted that the Mayor and Councilmembers received a(etter from Representative Alice Johnson who apologized that she was unable to be present at the Council meeting. The Councilmembers thanked Mr. Betzold and Mr. Chaudhary for their informative update. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA• NEW BUSINESS: 1. RECEIVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 2 1998: RECEIVED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 2, 1998. 2. SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP #98-17 BY WENCK ASSOCIATES INC. TO ALLOW A CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC IN A R-3 DISTRICT GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6431 HIGHWAY 65 (WARD 21• Mr. Burns, City Manager, explained that this action would allow a chiropractic clinic at 6431 Highway 65. The special use permit was approved by the Planning Commission at their meeting on December 2, with seven stipulations. APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #98-17, BY WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. TO ALLOW A CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC IN A R-3 DISTRICT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6431 HIGHWAY 65. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 1999 PAGE 3 3. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #98-38, BY WENCK ASSOCIATES, INC. TO DECREASE THE REQUIRED SETBACK FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO TAE DRIVEWAY FROM 20 FEET TO 0 FEET IN ORDER TO EXTEND THE DRIVEWAY FOR ADEQUATE FIRE PROTECTION FOR A PROPOSED CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC. GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6431 ffiGHWAY 65 (WARD 21: Mr. Burns, City Manager, noted that this variance was approved by the Appeals Commission at their December 23, 1998 meeting. Staff recommended Council's approval as we1L APPROVED VARIANCE REQUEST THAT WILL DECREASE THE REQUIRED SETBACK FOR THE PROPOSED CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC FROM 20 FEET TO 0 FEET. 4. MOT10N TO AUTHORiZE STAFF TO SOLICIT PROPOSALS FOR YARD WASTE TRANSFER SERVICES: Mr: Burns, City Manager, explained that the City is happy with their current contractor. However, they aiso want to make certain that the rates are competitive. This action would allow them to do so. AUTHORiZED STAFF TO SOLICIT PROPOSALS FOR YARD WASTE TRANSFER SERVICES WITH CHANCE IN DATE OF CONTRACT TO 1999. 5. APPROVE 1999 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED 1999 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCiL ACTION. 6. RECEIVE PROPOSALS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION/INSPECTION FOR TAE RIVERVIEW TERRACE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1999-1: Mr. Burns, City Manager, explained that the City received five responses to their request for proposals for the Riverview Terrace Improvement Project. Of the five, Orr, Schelen, Mayeron & Associates was being recommended for Council approval. OSM has agreed to an early year project start, and has further agreed to deduct $10,000 from their design fee if they do not achieve a March advertising date. The cost for the design of the Riverview Heights project was not to exceed $66,000. The cost for construction supervision and inspection is an amount not to exceed $150,000. RECEIVED PROPOSALS AND AWARDED CONTRACT FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION/INSPECTION FOR THE RIVERVIEW TERRACE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1999-1 TO ORR, SCHELEN, MAYERON & ASSOCIATES WITH TERMS AT A COST NOT TO EXCEED $66,000 FOR FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 1999 PAGE 4 DESIGN OF RIVERVIEW TERRACE AND A COST NOT TO EXCEED $150,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION AND INSPECTION. 7. RESOLUTION 1-1999, AUTHORiZING FLOOD DAMAGE AGREE-MENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RIVERVIEW TERRACE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1999-1: Mr. Burns, City Manager, explained that this resolution would authorize staff to seek DNR funding for acquisition of properties near the intersection of 79`� Way and Riverview Terrace. The properties are needed to construct water quality and flood improvement projects associated with the Riverview Heights Street Improvement Project. ADOPTED RESOLUTION 1-1999, AUTIiORIZING FLOOD DAMAGE AGREEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RIVERVIEW TERRACE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1999-1. 8. RESOLUTION NO. 2-1999, IMPOSiNG LOAD LIMITS ON PUBLIC STREETS AND A�GHWAYS IN TAE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA: Mr. Burns, City Manager, exp(ained that this resolution wouid establish load limits on City streets between March 15 and May 15, 1999. These load limits will restrict the weight of vehicles at a time when the base beneath the streets would be experiencing spring thaw. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2-1999, IMPOSING LOAD LIMITS ON PUBLIC STEETS AND HIGHWAYS IN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 3-1999, DESIGNATING DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY: Mr. Burns, City Manager, noted that staff recommended that Councii appoint the Public Works Director and Assistant Public Works Director as the City's representatives to the Suburban Rate Authority in 1999. This would be a continuation of the existing arrangement. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 3-1999, DESIGNATING DIRECTOR AND ALTERNATE DIRECTOR TO THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTIiORITY WITH AN AMENDMENT, CHANGING THE DATE IN THE RESOLUTION FROM 1998 TO 1999. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 4-1999, IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT FOR TOTINO- GRACE AIGFI SCAOOL (SHARX CLUB)(WARD 3): Mr. Burns, City Manager, explained that this was a renewal which extends from April 1, 1999 to March 31, 2001. The Fridley Police Department has no problems with the pull- tab operation at this location. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 1999 PAGE 5 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 4-1999, IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT FOR TOTINO-GRACE HIGft SCHOOL (SHARX CLUB)(WARD 3). ll. RESOLUTION NO. 5-1999. IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT FOR TOTINO- GRACE FIIGft SCHOOL (SPIKER'S GRILLE AND BEACHCLUB)(WARD 2): Mr. Burns, City Manager, explained that this was also a renewal. The Fridley Police Department has no problem with the pull-tab operation at this location. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 5-1999, IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT FOR TOTINO-GRACE ftIGH SCHOOL (SPIKER'S GRILLE AND BEACHCLUB)(WARD 2). 12. RESOLUTiON NO 6-1999, DESIGNATING OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES FOR TAE CiTY OF FRIDLEY: Mr. Burns, City Manager, noted that this resolution would appoint Norwest Bank N.A. as the City's official depository for 1999. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 6-1999, DESIGNATING NORWEST BANK N.A. AS THE OFFICtAL DEPOSITORY FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY. 13. RESOLUTtON NO 7-1999 DESIGNATING AN OFFICiAL_NEWSPAPER FOR TAE YEAR 1999: Mr. Burns, City Manager, noted that this resolution would designate Focus News as the official newspaper for the City of Fridley for 1999. It would also name Star Tribune as the City's second official newspaper for 1999. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 7-1999, DESIGNATING THE FOCUS NEWS AS THE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY FOR 1999 AND THE MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE AS THE CITY'S SECOND OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER FOR 1999. 14. APPROVE CITY OF FRIDLEY PAY EQUITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT: Mr. Burns, City Manager, noted that Sara Hill, Human Resources Manager, prepared the Pay Equity Report in compliance with the Local Government Pay Equity Act. Staff requested Council's approvaL APPROVED CITY OF FRIDLEY PAY EQUITY IMPLEMENTATION REPORT. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 1999 PAGE 6 15. APPOINTMENT: CITY EMPLOYEE: Mr. Burns, City Manager, explained that after reviewing forty applicants for the position of Staff Accountant, staff recommended the appointment of internal candidate, Craig Ellestad. Craig has an accounting degree from Augsburg University and has worked successfully for the City as Accountant over the past six years. APPROVED APPOINTMENT OF CRAIG ELLESTAD TO THE POSITION OF STAFF ACCOUNTANT FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY. 16. CLAIMS: APPROVED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 84756 THROUGH 84918. 17. LICENSES: APPROVED LICENSES AS SUBMITTED. 18. ESTiMATES: APPROVED ESTIMATES AS FOLLOWS: Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. Holstad and Knaak, PLC 3535 Vadnais Center Drive St. Paut, MN 55110 Services Rendered as City Attorney for the Month of December, 1998 $4,250.00 MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve the adoption of the consent agenda with the changes in dates as noted in Item 4 and Item 9. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the adoption of the agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 7 0 PUBLIC HEARINGS: 19. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA #98-03, BY THE CITY OF FRIDLEY. TO AMEND THE ZONING CODE TO ALLOW DAYCARE CENTERS IN PLACES OF WORSHIP SCHOOLS OR OTHER BUILDINGS HAVING A LOT AREA OF AT LEAST 12 000 S UARE FEET LOCATED ON A LOCAL ACCESS STREET IN THE R 1, R 2, R 3 AND R-4 ZONING DISTRICTS, AS A SPECIAL USE, WITH SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: MOTION by Councilmember Billings to waive the reading and open the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOT�, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC AEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:03 P.M. Mr. Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated that staff has applied for this text amendment to the City Zoning Code to allow daycare centers in places of worship, schools and other buildings having a lot area of at least 12,000 square feet and being located on a local access street in the R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4 zoning districts, as a special use with specific performance standards according to code. In addition to the current performance standards identified in the code for -daycare centers, additional performance standards were recommended in order to have a daycare center on a local access street. These include having a minimum lot size of at least 12,000 square feet, adequate area for a piayground, adequate and safe vehicle access areas to drop off and pick up children, and compliance with County and State standards regulating daycare centers. Mr. Hickok noted that the request was being made after being approached by different churches asking staff to investigate the possibility of amending the zoning ordinance to permit them to operate daycare centers when the facility abuts a local access street. Currently, daycare centers are allowed in facilities as long as they are located on arterial or collector streets under a special use. He noted that daycare centers are also permitted in other zoning districts, provided they obtain required permits. Mr. Hickok explained that a questionnaire was mailed out to 254 households within 350 feet of all churches within the City. Of the 98 responses, 72 percent of the respondents indicated that they would support a zoning change to allow daycare centers in churches located on local access streets. Nearly 12 percent indicated that they have had difficulty finding daycare in the City. However, 38 percent noted concern in allowing daycare centers on local access streets due to increased traffic, traffic speed, parking and safety of children. A brief discussion followed with regard to the wording in the zoning text amendment. Councilmember Billings asked if it was necessary to state the types of buildings that daycare centers would be allowed in. Mr. Hickok noted that the intent would be the same. However, he believed that the language would help to provide clarification. He also noted that should a church choose to operate a daycare center in their facility, the church would be required to obtain a special use permit, which would also require a public hearing. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 8 Councilmember Bolkcom asked about parking requirements for daycare facilities. Mr. Hickok responded that the City has in place a local standard ordinance which would assist them in determining the number of required parking spaces, based on the specific building size. Staff also utilizes an Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) source, which takes into consideration various aspects of the business, such as peak hours, etc. With no further questions, there was a MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the pub(ic hearing at 8:29 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:29 P.M. 20. CONSIDER APPLiCATION TO THE MINNESOTA TRADE AND ECONM�C DEVELOPMENT'S MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUND BY HARKER'S DISTRIBUT�ON INC., 7501 COMMERCE LANE N E• MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading and open the public hearing at 8:30 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Billin�s. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND TAE PUBLiC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:30 P.M. Ms. Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director, explained that Harker's Distribution Inc. requested that the City sponsor an application to the Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED) for the purpose of obtaining Minnesota Investment Funds in the amount of $45,000 to assist with the purchase of new machinery and equipment. Harker's is a privately- owned meat processing and distribution business. They purchased the property at 7501 Commerce Lane in the fall of 1998. They intend to produce custom cuts of ineat for fine dining estabiishments and restaurants, as well as serve some other customers in the Midwest. As part of Harker's proposed expansion they intend to purchase approximately $100,000 in new equipment and machinery. Additionally, they intend to spend an additional $200,000 for remodeling of the interior of the building. They plan to create twenty new jobs at the location, and in two years, they may also expand the business. The grant of $45,000 would be a forgiven loan with a term of two years at five percent interest. If they are able to meet ali of the job creation goals, the company would not need to repay the loan. Ms. Dacy noted that this application was consistent with past applications that the City has made on behalf of companies for DTED funds. Ms. Dacy noted that the petitioner was not able to be present at the meeting, but he did submit some written comments, which she distributed to Council. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to receive into the record the letter from Harker's Distribution Inc. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 1999 PAGE 9 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Pro Tem Barnette asked what obligations the City has with regard to this loan. Ms. Dacy responded that there were no obligations on the part of the City. The City would act as a sponsor, putting together all of the paperwork and seeing that Harker's complies with the job and wage goals. The City does not have any financial obligations. With no further questions, there was a MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing at 8:36 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARiNG WAS CLOSED AT 8:36 P.M. NEW BUSINESS. 21. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRiDLEY CITY CODE, CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED "ZONING", BY AMENDING SECTIONS 205 07 O1C (4), 205 08 O1 C(4), 205 09 O1 C(3), AND 205.10.O1.C. (41, TO ALLOW, BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT, DAYCARE 'FACiLITTES ON PROPERTiES THAT EXCEED 12,000 SQUARE FEET IN TRE R-1. SINGLE FAMiLY DISTRICT; R-2, TW O FAMTLY DISTRICT; R-3, GENERAL MULTIPLE UNIT DiSTRICT; AND R-4. MOBiLE HOME PARK DISTWCT: MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve the first reading of an ordinance recodifying the Fridley City Code, Chapter 205, entitled "Zoning", by amending Sections 205.07.O1.C. (4), 205.08.O1.C. (4), 205.09.O1.C. (3), and 205.10.O1.C. (4), to allow, by special use permit, daycare facilities on properties that exceed 12,000 square feet in the R-, Single Family District; R-2, Two Family District; R-3, General Mu(tiple Unit District; and R-4, Mobile Home Park District and to waive the reading thereof. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 22. RESOLUTiON NO. 8-1999 AUTHORiZiNG THE CITY OF FRIDLEY TO ACT AS THE LEGAL SPONSOR FOR AN APPLICATION TO TFIE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ON BEFIALF OF HARKER'S DISTRTBUTION INC. FOR MINNESOTA INVESTMENT FUNDS: Ms. Dacy noted that a minor correction to Resolution No. 8-1999 found on Page 22.02 of the agenda. The third paragraph, line 6 should be changed to read "... Compliance Section (S-7) of the Business and Community Development ..." MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the adoption of Resolution No. 8-1999, A Resolution Authorizing the City of Fridley to Act as the Legal Sponsor for an Application to the Department of Trade and Economic Development on Behalf of Harker's Distribution Inc. for FRiDLEY CITY COUNCiL MEETING OF JANUARY 4. 1999 PAGE 10 Minnesota Investment Funds, as amended, and to waive the reading. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MA�t'OR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 23. VARIANCE REOUEST, VAR #98-03, BY ROBERT GRANGER, TO INCREASE THE ALLOWABLE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 17 FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN OPEN DECK, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6310 SEVENTH STREET N E(WARD 1)• Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, explained that Mr. Granger was requesting a variance to increase the allowable encroachment in the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 17 feet to ailow for the construction of an open deck, at his property located at 6310 Seventh Street N.E. Mr. Granger's hardship statement was that the requested deck would allow for greater usage of the livable area and would not change the character of the neighborhood in any way. Mr. Hickok stated that on a field visit staff noted that alternatives exist which would allow the proposed deck to be constructed without a variance. The City has a 23-foot drainage and utility easement along the west side of the property, which would require a hold harmless agreement if the deck were built as proposed. Mr. Hickok provided a drawing of the site and the proposed deck. The proposed deck contained both an upper and lower platform with stairs coming off each side of the lower platform. Unfortunately, the steps coming off the lower platform would cause an encroachment beyond what is allowable. The alternative noted by staff would be to run the stairway off the north or south side of the upper deck; however, the petitioner has noted that with the window configuration he would prefer to construct the steps as originally proposed. Councilmember Billings noted that this case was a difficult one for the Appeals Commission. He sincerely respected the decision of the Appeals Commission; however, contrary to their recommendation, he was in favor of the variance request. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve Variance Request, VAR #98-33, by Robert Granger, to increase the allowable encroachment into the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 17 feet to allow the construction of an open deck, generally located at 63I0 Seventh Street N.E., with the stipulation that the petitioner present a Hold Harmless Agreement to the City of Fridley and that it be filed with Anoka County. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. Councilmember Wolfe asked if the deck would run the full length of the house. Mr. Hickok noted that it would not run the entire length but would cover a substantial portion. Councilmember Wolfe noted, if this were the case, the stairway would likely be visibie from the front of the house. Mr. Hickok responded that it was possible; however, the side yard setbacks are rather large, and it could be done without encroaching. He noted that there are a number of other homes in Fridley where this has been done. Mr. Granger stated that he designed the deck to be attractive. With the location of the windows, he really would rather not run the stairway on either side of the upper deck. FRiDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETiNG OF JANUARY 4, 1999 PAGE 11 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 24. VARIANCE REOUEST, VAR #98-34, BY SPIKER'S GRILLE AND BEACFICLUB, TO INCREASE TftE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF A SIGN TO 50 FEET, THE MAXIMUM SiZE TO 200 FEET, AND TO PLACE A FREE STANDING SIGN ON AN ENTRY DRIVE, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7651 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. (WARD 2): Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, explained that Mr. Pelstring of Spiker's Grille & Beachclub requested a variance to increase the size of a pylon sign from 80 feet to 200 square feet, and to increase the maximum height of a pylon sign from 25 feet to 50 feet and to place a pylon sign adjacent to an entry driveway rather than locating it 10 feet from a driveway or property line. City Code requires that pylon signs be no more than 25 feet in height, that they be no more than 80 square feet in size, and that they be at least 10 feet from any entry drive or property line. The hardship statement of the petitioner was that this property is currently served and immediately adjacent only next to the frontage road. In fact, the majority of the site is set back approximately l00 feet off the frontage road. As such, the property is 250 feet or more off either of the two major thoroughfares (Highway 65 and Osborne Road). The property is zoned for commercial development, and their use is appropriate for this zoning. It was consistent with commercial zoning that this type of site would typically have direct "road site" exposure. A sign variance would be needed to overcome this obstacle. They believe the physical location and separation from the roadways are unique within the City. The current configuration of the frontage road was completed prior to their acquisition of the site. The developments of the individual lots, which physically separate this site from the major thoroughfares, were all completed prior to their acquisition. They stated that they do not believe the signage would directly impact any residential development. Additionally, they believe that the area signage (i.e. the height of the Friendly Chevrolet sign and/or the "off-site" signage for Tam's Rice Bowl Restaurant) were very consistent and/or exceed their variance request. Mr. Hickok noted that the City has not granted any similar sign variances within the past ten years. The signs mentioned were both legal, non-conforming signs that had sign permits issued prior to the current sign ordinance being adopted. The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to deny this variance request. The Commission did, however, recommend that Council investigate a creative solution to the hardship as offered by the petitioner by whatever means possible even if it requires setting a precedent. Mayor Pro Tem Barnette asked if the 80 square foot sign limit applied also to rooftop signage. Mr. Hickok responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there were any discussions on signage with the petitioner prior to construction. Mr. Hickok stated that this was a topic of discussion early on. Staff tried to steer the petitioner in another direction to avoid seeking a variance. He noted that the petitioner also explored the possibility of purchasing a 600-square foot parcel of land on the corner for a signage site. An 80 square foot sign on that parcel would give them the necessary exposure and FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEET7NG OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 12 be adequate for their needs. Staff has informed them; however, that a lot split would not likely be approved for this purpose. Councilmember Billings asked when the statutory sixty-day period expires on this variance request. Mr. Hickok responded that it would expire prior to Council's next scheduled meeting on January 25. Mr. Pat Pelstring, Spiker's Grille & Beachclub, stated they believed that they had a unique business and a unique site. Finding the right site was difficult, and they understood it would be difficult when it came to identification. At least eighty percent of their income would be derived from the restaurant and lodge business. It would be very important for people to be able to find them. They have been trying all along to work with staff to come up with an acceptable solution to the problem. He stated that he could not find a similar situation to their's where the immediate access and visibility of the site was restricted and blocked entirely by buildings between the main thoroughfare and their building. Furthermore, the length of the entry road into their site is approximately 100 feet. The address of their site is 7651 Highway 65, which he feels will also likely cause some confusion. Mr. Pe(string discussed some of the options they have considered including the purchase of a small parcel of property on the corner. Councilmember Billings informed Mr. Pelstring that he also felt it would be very difficult for them to obtain a lot split for this purpose. Mr. Pelstring stated that an 80 square foot sign on top of their building would not provide them the visibility they need. Therefore, they requested a sign variance to increase the size from 80 square feet to 200 square feet, an increase in height from 25 to 50 feet and that they be allowed to place a sign adjacent to the entry drive. He noted that the Friendly Chevrolet sign is 47 feet high (225 syuare feet). With their facility located an additional 150 feet back, their sign would appear to be lower on the horizon than the Friendly Chevrolet sign, and their sign would be smaller. If they were allowed to construct a sign at a height of 45 feet with a total square footage of 120 square feet, it would meet their base si;n requirements. The possibility of neon striping on their building was also discussed. Mr. Pelstring noted that while this would help, it would not identify the business, which they feel would be so important. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that granting a variance request such as this would set a huge precedence. The fact is that they knew when they wanted to move to the City what the City's requirements were regarding signage. Staff has continued to remind them of that. Mr. Pelstring stated that given the distance their property is located from the frontage road and the visual separation, he did not think the City would be setting a precedent as a hardship was very evident. City signage requirements would make it difficult for their business to compete with other restaurants in the area. Mr. Hickok reminded Mr. Pelstring that the Friendly Chevrolet sign was a pre-existing, non- conforming sign. When the business name changed, the only change that was made to the sign was the content. Therefore, they were not required to comply with the new signage requirements. FRiDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 13 Councilmember Biilings stated that he personally would not have an issue with the third portion of the variance request; however, he felt that the height issue was one of great concern. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve that portion of Variance #98-34, to locate a sign on entry driveway, which will rec�uire that sign is within 10 feet of driveway and/or property line. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to deny those portions of Variance #98-34, which would increase the height of a sign from 25 feet to 50 feet and increase the size of a sign from 80 square feet to 200 square feet. Seconded by Councilmember Billings (for discussion only). Councilmember Billings stated that this property was a somewhat unique site, but he could not support a motion to deny both of these portions of the variance request. Councilmember Bolkcom .felt that perhaps Council should instruct staii to meet with the petitioner to look at some type of compromising size between 80 square feet and 200 square feet. Councilmember Billings stated that he would prefer to keep the size at 80 square feet and consider raising the allowable height to 35 feet. Perhaps the petitioner could further examine alternatives to the 25 foot height requirement by having a sign company assist him in determining how high a sign would need to be in order to provide adequate visibility. If the petitioner were ajreeable, this item could be tabled; however, an agreement for a sixty-day extension would be necessary by both parties. Mr. Pelstring stated that a sixty-day extension would be acceptable. Councilmember Bolkcom asked to withdraw her motion. Councilmember Billings withdrew his second. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table consideration of a portion of Variance #98-34 to increase the size of a sign from 80 square feet to 200 square feet and to increase the maximum height of a sign from 25 feet to 50 feet, in order to ascertain the necessary information to fully examine and study the request, and to extend the review period for City Council action an additional sixty days and to notify the petitioner in writing of the sixty-day extension as soon as possible. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRLED UNANIMOUSLY. 25. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #98-37, BY BRUCE BOGIE, MERCHANTS MAINTENANCE & CONSTRUCTION TO INCREASE TFIE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF THE MAIN BUILDING AND ALL ACCESSORY BUILDNGS FROM 30 PERCENT TO 32 PERCENT• TO DECREASE THE DRIVE WIDTH FROM 25 FEET TO 23 FEET• AND TO DECREASE THE SETBACK FROM FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 14 THE ALLEY FROM 15 FEET TO 5 FEET NINE INCHESE TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN EIGHT-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5427 FOURTH STREET N E(WARD 3)• Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, explained that Mr. Bruce Bogie requested a variance to increase the maximum lot coverage of the main building and all accessory buildings from 30 percent to 32 percent; to decrease the drive width from 25 feet to 23 feet; and to decrease the setback from the alley from 15 feet to 5 feet 9 inches to allow the construction of an eight-unit apartment building at property located at 5427 Fourth Street. Staff recommended that the petitioner move the proposed main building two feet to the north to eliminate the need for the variance for the driveway width, which would decrease the side yard setback from 15 feet to 13 feet. Mr. Hickok presented a photograph of the site. There was a single family home on the property; however the property is currently vacant. Mr. Hickok read the petitioner's hardship statement. He noted that staff tried to work with the petitioner to scale back the size of the building to eliminate the need for variances. Because of the owner's desire to use slab on grade construction and make the units accessible, options to scale back the size of the development are very limited. Staff suggested to the petitioner that he reduce the number of units; however, the petitioner felt the current layout was the more desirable to the owners and prospective tenants. Additionally, staff would like the entire building to be moved two feet to the north, which would require a sideyard setback from 15 feet to 13 feet, but would allow the property to meet the required driveway width of 25 feet thus eliminating the need for that variance request. Mr. Hickok noted that staff received a telephone call from the resident north of the proposed apartment building who voiced concerns about granting any of the requested variances. The caller also voiced an opposition to moving the building two feet to the north. The neighborhood was notified of the proposal to provide them with an opportunity to speak on this issue if they wished to do so. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to concur with the recommendations of the Appeals Commission, approving the variance of the sideyard setback from 15 feet to 13 feet, the decrease in the alley setback from 15 feet to 5 feet 9 inches, and the increase in the lot size from 30 percent to 32 percent, and to further concur with the recommendation to deny that portion of Variance Request #98-37 to decrease the drive width from 25 feet to 23 feet. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 26. RESOLUTION NO. 9-1999 AUTHORTZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE ANOKA COUNTY JOINT LAW ENFORCEMENT CENTRAL RECORDS PROJECT: Mr. Dave Sallman, Public Safety Director, explained that the current Fridley Police Department computerized system was purchased in 1980. Approximately five years ago, staff began investigating the option of replacing the system at a cost of approximately $275,000; however, a FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 15 decision was made to hold out. Some interest was shown by other members of the Anoka County Joint Law Enforcement Council to pursue a joint project. The_Anoka County Board approved contracts for a joint police record system software and to set up the system, project management during installation and a joint powers agreement with participating cities for the financing and management of the project. The expense would be considerably less than if the City replaced the existing system. Additionally, the County has agreed to provide $400,000 toward the total cost of the project, with the remaining costs divided up based upon a percentage of police calls for service. The final costs are not available; however, the estimates provided are likely high. Mr. Rick Pribyl, Finance Director, noted that funds have been set aside in the City's information systems fund for a number of years, which is where the initial funding will come from. He presented a breakdown of the total purchases by the County, which would be repaid by the City of Fridley over the next four years. Additionally, he provided information regarding ongoing costs which would need to be paid annually by the City. Fridley's portion of the estimated cost of the system would be $125,581.83. Mr. Pribyl noted that at the present time; the City is paying approximately $17,000 per year just for hardware maintenance of the existing equipment. With the shared cost being considerably lower than what it would be for Fridley to purchase their � own system, there was a MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the adoption of Resolution No. 9-1999, Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of a Joint Powers Agreement Relating to the Anoka County Joint Law Enforcement Central Records Project. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 27. APPROVE PROPOSED 1999 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND THE E T C FRiDLEY COMMUNTCATIONS WORKSHOP, INCORPORATED (E.T.C. CHANNEL 33): MOTION by Councilmember Billings to concur in the agreement between the City of Fridley and E.T.C. Channel 33, as found on Pages 27.03 and 27.04 of the agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to amend Item 6, line 5, found on page 27.03 to read "April l, 1999, July 1, 1999, October 1, 1999, and February 1, 2000. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MTOION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Billings noted that the agreement was prepared by E.T.C. They requested an amount of $45,300 for the year 1999. The City budgeted an amount to equal $43,554. E.T.C. Channe133 already executed the contract. Therefore, both parties must agree to it. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to amend Item 4, Line 1, of the Agreement to read "For the period of this agreement, the City will grant to ETC the amount of 543,554 from ..." Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 16 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Billings noted that public access was now, and always has been, an essential aspect of our cable television franchise agreement with Paragon Cable and its predecessors. The City of Fridley has an agent to do the actual operation of the public access, which has been E.T.C. 33 for many years. As a part of the annual agreement with E.T.C., certain information must be provided to the City of Fridley on a quarterly basis. This would allow the City to monitor the effectiveness of its relationship with E.T.C. Channel 33. In July 1998, E.T.C: did not provide any information on the services provided. In October 1998, E.T.C. provided some information but not the level of content that the City was accustomed to. In November 1998, the City requested additionai information. As of the present time, E.T.C. Channel 33 had not provided that information. He felt that it was time to evaluate whether another operator couid provide the same, or better, service at a lower cost. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table indefinitely the 1999 agreement between E.T.C. and the City of Fridley. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what Councilmember Billings wished to do with the existing program, if the contract was tabled. The contract expired December 31, 1998. Councilmember Billings stated that if the agreement was tabled, he intended to authorize the City Manager to find someone to do the public access on a temporary basis and to prepare a request for proposals for public access, contacting the Fridley School District, Paragon Cable and E.T.C. Channe133, as well as anyone else who may be interested. Councilmember Bolkcom wondered if it would be of greater benefit to have a representative of E.T.C. Channel 33 and a representative from Paragon Cable come to the City Council conference meeting on Monday evening, January 11 to discuss the matter in greater detail. Perhaps an option would be to extend the current agreement by thirty days and to review the situation. Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, stated that if the City agreed to something different than the agreement presented, it would require that E.T.C. Channel 33 also be in agreement to those changes. John King, 13355 Partridge Street, Andover, representing E.T.C. Channel 33 stated that several reports have been presented to the Cable Commission. A reply was written in response to the November request and delivered to the front desk/reception area. Ms. Becky Harvet, 13362 Partridge Street N.W., Andover, Chairperson for E.T.C. Channel 33 stated that their company received the letter from Brian Strand, Video Specialist. At that time, she contacted him and was referred to Mr. Burns. She spoke with Mr. Burns and told him it would be difficult for them to provide all of the information that the City was requesting. A follow-up letter also went out . after that telephone conversation. E.T.C. Channel 33 has addressed a number of the questions and provided information; however, they noted it was difficult to report in the detail that has been requested, especially considering their staffing level. FRiDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 17 Mr. King stated that he felt it had been unclear what information the City really needed. He wanted to meet personally with City staff to get a better idea as to what they wouid like to see. The type of reporting that the City requested was never requested before. Mr. King noted that actual productions at this time were down due to equipment problems so they had been doing a lot more community shows. Larry Hutchinson, Circle Pines, stated that he was a board member of E.T.C. Channel 33. He watched from the inside and saw the hard work that has gone into this channel over the years. Mayor Pro Tem Barnette stated that what the City wanted to know was how many Fridley residents were actually participating in the program. That is the information that had not been made available. Mr. Hutchinson noted that they currently lack the manpower to get this information together. Some of it the information would need to be obtained from past tapings, etc. Ms. Harvet also noted that it wouid take time to pull the information together. That type of responsibility could not be given to a new volunteer. Councilmember Bolkcom noted that this information had been requested over a six-month period. E.T.C. Channel 33 should have had adequate time to provide the information. Councilmember Billings stated that one of the things he wanted to determine was how many residents were actually getting on the channel and exercising their free speech rights. He has often seen residents from other communities such as Andover, Centervilie, Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park on the channel. He wondered if Fridley was actually paying for the north metropolitan area to exercise their free speech. It appeared that the channel is costing the City of Fridley approximately $6,000 to $10,000 for each resident's participation on E.T.C. Channel 33. If this was so, the product delivered by E.T.C. Channel 33 was not cost effective for the City of Fridley. That was why he was asking that this item be tabled for further consideration and discussion. Ms. Harvet stated that she would like the opportunity to work with the City on these issues before they choose to table this indefinitely. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Billings stated that he felt there were a number of options for continued programming. One option would be to offer E.T.C. Channel 33 an opportunity to extend the 1998 contract with all of the terms and conditions for a specified period of time. Another option would be to authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with someone else to provide temporary public access. Ms. Harvet stated that the next scheduled board meeting for E.T.C. Channel 33 was on Wednesday, January 13� FRiDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETTNG OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 18 Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she wanted a response to the information requested by the City. She wanted to have the information available at the Council Conference session on Monday, January 25. She fe(t this matter had been ongoing for some time and she wanted to get to the bottom of it. Ms. Harvet indicated that it would be highly likely that the E.T.C. Channel 33 Board would agree to a thirty-day extension to the existing contract, extending it to January 31, 1999. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to agree to extend to E.T.C. Channel 33 a thirty-day extension of the 1998 agreement, through January 3 l, 1999, with the compensation at one-twelfth of the 1998 agreed upon compensation. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 28. 1999 FRiDLEY CITY COUNCiL AND STAFF APPOINTMENTS: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to appoint Councilmember Barnette as Mayor Pro Tem. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARR(ED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve the re-appointments for the Anoka County Law Enforcement Council, the Association af Metropolitan Municipalities, the League of Minnesota Cities, School District Nos. 13, 14, and 16, and the Northstar Corridor Development Authority as printed on page 28.01 with the amendment that Councilmember Wolfe's name be substituted for Councilmember Schneider. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Billings noted that one vacancy exists for the North Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau. He asked Mr. Burns if this couid be filled by William Champa, Management Assistant. Mr. Burns stated that he believed that would be acceptable. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to appoint William Champa as representative for the North Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 29. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: There were no informal status reports. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4 1999 PAGE 19 ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adjourn the January 4, 1999 Regular meeting of the City Council at 11:15 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR PRO TEM BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE JANUARY 4, 1999 REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL WAS ADJOURNED AT 11:15 P.M. Respectfuliy submitted, Tamara D. Saeflce Recording Secretary Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayor ___._ --3e��--�-�- — . � � � T �..�,�, ,��-��`-- �oc„u� � � w�� h� a� �a� '�, �i-, 2�� /99'. � u� � UNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 1999C�'-�-� „'� FRIDLEY CITY CO � oic�a. F�uoi.er T'he City of Fridley will not discriminate against or harass anyone in the admission or access to, or treatment, or employment in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meefing of January 4, 1999 i�.��/ � � / APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): Receive Proposals and Award Contract for Curbside Recycling Services .......... 5.01 - 5.03 � Approve Change Order No. 3 for the Fridley Community Center Lower Level Project No. 319 ................................... 6.01 - 6.03 1 . . .,Q CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 6, 1999 _ • •' � _'� Chairperson Savage called the January 6, 1999, Pianning Commission meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. RO�L CALL: Members Present: Diane Savage, Dave Kondrick, LeRoy Oquist, Dean Saba, Brad Sielaff, Connie Modig, Larry Kuechle Members Absent: None Others Present: Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant Missy Daniels, Planning Assistant Julie Tostenson, Community Development Secretary Woody Nelson, Onan Tom Becker, Opus Mark Kusnierek, CSM Properties APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 2 1998 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: M TI N by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to approve the December 2, 1998, Planning Commission minutes as wntten. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. INTRODUCTION OF STAFF: Mr. Hickok introduced Ms. Tostenson, Community Development Secretary, and Ms. Daniels, Planning Assistant, who works with code enforcement. 1. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF REPLAT p�#98-04. BY ONAN CORPORATION M G NELSON: To replat property to accommodate the development of a warehousing facility on Tracts A-D, RLS114, generally located at 1400 73rd Avenue N.E. M TI by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:38 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated the replat request is by Onan Corporation to accommodate the development of a warehousing facility on the site. The number of parcels will remain the same; however, the boundaries of the parcels will be redefined as a result of this action. Mr. Bolin stated the property is located east of old Central between 69th and 73rd. The property is currently zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. To the north is R-1, Single Family, and 1.01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 6,1999 PAGE 2 R-3, Multiple Family, zoning; to the east is the City of Mounds View; to the south is R-3, Multiple Family, and M-2, Heavy Industrial; and to the southwest is M-2, Heavy Industrial, specifically Medtronics. Mr. Bolin stated the site was platted into its current configuration in 1988. This was done to create some separately defined parcels because there was some contamination on part of the property. In order to clear the title for construction of the building, they split the land in this manner. The preliminary plat is intended to accommodate a new 406,000 square foot warehouse facility. The current Tract A is the parcel that had the original contamination. Tract B was created to accommodate a planned building that never materialized and also contains a"french drain" system from past clean-up efforts. Tract C contains the existing buildings. Tract D was created to provide public right-of-way into Tract B if that was ever developed. Mr. Bolin stated the proposed plat now consists of Lot 1 which is basieally the same as the present Tract C. The proposed plat also has a Lot 2 which is the present Tract A. � The proposed Lot 3 is similar to Tract B but has been expanded further east. This is where Onan intends to build the new warehouse facility. They also have a new public right-of-way which will be extended on the east side of the new Lot 3. Outlot A will take the place of the present Tract D. This will serve to give a public right-of-way and be used as a storm water retention pond area. Mr. Bolin stated staff recommends approval of Replat request, P.S. #98-04. The new lots, except Outlot A, will meet the code definitions. Staff recommends the following stipulations 1. A 20-foot utility easement should be provided along the easterly property line of the Onan property. 2. A road with 60-foot right-of-way, 30 mile per hour curves, and necessary cul-de- sacs or bubble should be identified to provide access to the proposed lot splits. 3. The proposed access road will continue along the eastem edge of Lot 3 for a minimum of 150 feet in order to meet the lot width requirements. 4. The sewer services should be designed to service the proposed and future lots on the plat. 5. Sewer connection to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) interceptor will require MCES approvaL 6. The water system should be designed to provide service to the existing and proposed lots. 7. Fire hyd�ants associated with the development will be flushed by City crews. Operation, maintenance and repair will remain with the property owners. 8. Storm water pond calculations need to be approved by the Engineering Department. 1.02 L�► ► •ui� •► � � _► _: • ... 9. A storm water pond agreement needs to be executed to �include the outFall system for the pond. 10. A user fee will be required from the property owner for the storm system placed within the City right-of-way. 11. The storm water outlet pipe will require the repair of Stinson Avenue and the installation of B618 concrete curb and gutter. 12. The storm sewer pond design must be approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District. 13. Petitioner shall combine Outlot A with Lot 1 for tax purposes before the final plat is approved. Mr. Kondrick asked how long it would take for the storm water pond design to be approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Mr. Hickok stated this approval is being reviewed at the time this request is being approved. Mr. Sielaff asked the purpose of the french drain and clean-up of the site. Mr. Bolin stated the french drain is a hole punched in the ground usually through clay. The hole is then filled with a more porous material, such as gravel, that allows run-off to drain into the ground at a quicker rate. He does not know why it was put in Tract B. Tract A is where the contamination was. He would guess that the french drain was put in B to keep the water in that area from running into A. Mr. Sielaff asked if the site is being monitored at this time. Mr. Bolin stated he is not sure of the status of the current monitoring. The petitioner may be able to answer that question. Ms. Savage asked if staff has received any comments from the public conceming this request. Mr. Bolin stated staff has received no comments. Mr. Hickok stated that regarding the environmental issues, an environmental consultant brought on by the petitioner is working to make certain that future development will be sensitive to the work already done to clean up the contamination on the site and to make sure that, as development occurs, whatever needs to be contained is contained and any necessary clean up happens also. Mr. Sielaff asked if the petitioner submits something to the City to keep the City informed. Mr. Hickok stated Onan has made application to DTED and the Metropolitan Council for funds. They will be going back through the funding cycle in May. Though no funds were available through DTED on the first round, the Metropolitan Council offered funds. It does look good for the next round of funding to get additional dollars to make this project work. 1.03 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 6, 1999 PAGE 4 There are extensive environmental issues still being dealt with. The cost is to be shared and helped finance through DTED and the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Sielaff asked if there is additional clean up and/or monitoring continuing on this site. Is the work going to be overseen by the Metropolitan Council? Mr. Hickok stated, yes, there is continued monitoring. The environmental folks report to both DTED and the Metropolitan Council while working through the environmental issues. Mr. Nelson stated he is the director of corporate facilities. He is excited about the project. This does a lot for Onan and the community to put land back into productive use. Ms. Savage asked if the petitioner had any problems with the stipulations. Mr. Nelson stated they had some questions. Stipulation #7 refers to fire hydrants. He was not sure what they have in mind. They have maintained fire hydrants in the past but it is not a big deal. Staff talked about the outlot and they need to understand what that really means for them as well. Mr. Becker has been involved with Onan and Murphy on the design work for the site. Mr. Becker stated the only other issues are details about how the sewer line will be designed to service both lots to satisfy the requirements of the City Public Works Department. He did not see a problem with that though. Ms. Savage asked if the petitioner believed they could work out the details with the staff. Mr. Nelson stated, yes. . Mr. Sielaff stated he would like to follow up on the environmental issues on the site. Mr. Nelson stated they are seeking funding for some of the environmental issues. The clean-up that was done on the site in the mid-1980's was hard core, and it was funded by Boise Cascade, Onan, and the railroad. It was done in accordance with a court order. Monitoring is in place and is ongoing as a part of that declaratory judgment. What they expect to encounter and because of the french drain, they want to make sure that is presenred so it can still function. Th.e french drain has not functioned as it was installed to do for some period of time. The MPCA said to tum it off. It is there but not functioning as it was designed to do. It is in place, and they will leave it in place as the site is developed. Mr. Sielaff asked Mr. Nelson to explain what a french drain is. Mr. Nelson stated the section where the contamination is centered is a central treating operation. The implementation mechanism is a slurry wall dug into the glacial till that is about 40 feet deep and filled with clay. A cap was placed with clean fill over the top of that so there is no recharge from the rain or snow melt. The french drain was dug into the surface aquifer about 26 feet below the surface. Then they put in pea gravel and sand with a textile cover to keep it from silting up. That is about 4 to 5 feet below the surface of the ground water which, on this site, is about 8 to 12 feet. The thought was that this went into the Metropolitan Council sewer with a valve so that you could tum on the french drain and lower the level within Tract B. When you shut it off, the water level would come up to flush it. They did not see a difference however, so they shut it off. 1.04 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING,�ANUARY 6 1999 PAGE � Mr. Sielaff asked if there are some additionai things that need to be done at the site. Mr. Nelson stated there are considerations that have to be made in the construction process to preserve the capability to continue to work. Mr. Sielaff asked what the connection was with the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Nelson stated there is funding for retuming contaminated sites to usable purposes. That is really what they are talking about. He did not have all of the details. They also have a contingency plan approved by the MPCA where, during the constru�tion process, they have a mechanism to monitor the excavation so that if something is encountered, they have a plan to take care of it. That will be put in process also. Mr. Sielaff asked, if something was to occur on that site, is there a way to let the City know what is going on? Perhaps there should be a stipulation that the City be notified of any contamination. His reason for bringing this issue up is because wellhead protection is something the City is looking at and this is a potential source of contamination. Mr. Nelson stated he did not see a problem with that. M TI N by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:58 P.M. Mr. Kondrick asked if the Commission should add a stipulation that the City be notified if contamination is found. Mr. Saba stated that Onan has been a good corporate citizen anc� probably would not have a problem with notifying the City. He did not believe a stipulation was necessary. Mr. Sielaff stated he suggested the stipulation so that the City would be aware if anything happened. M TI by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend approval of Replat request, P.S. #98-04, by M. G. Nelson, Onan Corporation, to replat property to accommodate the development of a warehousing facility on Tracts A-D, RLS114, generally located at 1400 73rd Avenue N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. A 20-foot utility easement should be provided along the easterly property line of the Onan property. 2. A road with 60-foot right-of-way, 30 mile per hour cunres, and necessary cul-de- sacs or bubble should be identified to provide access to the proposed lot splits. 3. The proposed access road will continue along the eastem edge of Lot 3 for a minimum of 150 feet in order to meet the lot width requirements. 4. The sewer services should be designed to service the proposed and future (ots on the plat. 1.05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 6 1999 PAGE 6 5. Sewer connection to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) interceptor will require MCES approval. 6. The water system should be designed to provide service to the existing and proposed lots. 7. Fire hydrants associated with the development will be flushed by City crews. Operation, maintenance and repair will remain with the property owners. 8. Storm water pond calculations need to be approved by the Engineering Department. 9. A storm water pond agreement needs to be executed to include the outfall system for the pond. 10. A user fee will be required from the property owner for the storm system placed within the City right-of-way. 11. The storm water outlet pipe will require the repair of Stinson Avenue and the installation of B618 concrete curb and gutter. 12. The storm sewer pond design must be approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District. 13. Petitioner shall combine Outlot A with Lot 1 for tax purposes before the final plat is approved. 14. Petitioner shall notify the City of any contaminants that surFace, for wellhead protection. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Bolin stated the City Council would consider the request on January 25. 2. PUBUC HEARINC• CONSIDE ATION OF REP T P S#�3 05 BY CSM PROPERTIES. DAVE CARLA D: To replat property on Lot 1, Block 1, Northco Business Park 5th Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, for the development of vacant land, generally located on Northco Drive. TI N by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:02 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioner is requesting a replat of a portion of the Northco Business Park 5th Addition to accommodate the development of a piece of vacant land. The replat will create one additional parcel. 1.06 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 6 1999 PAGE 7, Mr. Bolin stated the subject parcel is located just north of Columbia Arena between 71 st Avenue and Northco Drive. The lot is wooded at the northe�ly portion. The rest of the lot is fai�ly level with grasses and smaller trees. The property is currently zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. The properties to the north, east, south and west are all zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. The lot to the west is vacant. Mr. Bolin stated the Northco Business Park was platted in 1989. The 2"� and 3nd Additions were platted in 1990 and redefined the original lot configuration to accommodate specific building needs. The 4�' Addition further defined the parcels along the east side of the No�thco property in 1993. In 1994, the Northco Business Parlc ,5th Addition was approved to create its current configuration. This is common with new business parks and commercial and industrial areas to go through a series of replats to accommodate new development as it happens. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioner is requesting to split the current Lot 1 into two lots. Both properties would have sufficient lot area and frontage. The petitioner is requesting the vacant parcel be replatted. Mr. Bolin stated staff recommends approval of Replat request, P.S. #98-05, with the following stipulations: 1. The required 131 parking spaces shall be on-site and usable. 2. A guardrail shall be provided between the roadway and retaining wall on the storm water pond. 3. A park dedication fee of $4,605.40 shall be paid before the building permit is issued. 4. Petitioner shall record a shared driveway Access and Maintenance Agreement. 5. Future 71 st Street upgrade Assessment Agreement must be signed and filed with the City prior to the issuance of a building permit for the newly created lot. Mr. Kondrick asked if stipulation #5 is included to assure that they pay their share if the street is put in. Mr. Bolin stated this is correct. He showed the site plan which shows a building just over 65,000 square feet. The front of the building would curve and follow the contour of the street. He also reviewed the proposed building elevations. The proposed building would be constructed of block with windows on the front side. Mr. Oquist asked what does the parking requirement have to do with a replat request (stipulation #1). The parking requirement should be part of the building construction. Mr. Bolin stated staff received design plans with the application and noticed that the proposed parking was not adequate. Mr. Oquist stated the request is only to address a replat. Why would a stipulation regarding parking be there? 1.07 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 6 1999 PAGE 8 Mr. Bolin stated the development review committee believed it was important to do this to get the required parking. This is one way to make sure of that. One area the proposed parking lot is not curbed. If cars are parked by the loading docks, semi's would not be able to back up. Before they go on and draw up further plans for this site, they need to get parking in other areas. Mr. Oquist asked if this request would come back before the Planning Commission when the petitioner gets ready to construct the building. Should they not be addressing the parking at that time rather than now with a replat request? Ms. Savage stated that as long as the petitioner has no objections, she believed it would be more expeditious to take care of it now. Mr. Hickok stated it is very impo�tant as you look at the layout of the building. Where the line is in a subdivision is an impo�tant piece. Parking is related to the subdivision in that, if the line is drawn in the wrong place, they cannot get enough parking on the site. At this time, if that stipulation becomes an issue with the petitioner, it may mean that they need to move the line over. For that reason, this was added as a stipulation. Mr. Oquist stated stipulation #4 refers to a shared driveway access and maintenance agreement. With whom will they share a driveway? Mr. Bolin stated they will share a driveway with the property from which they are splitting. The entrance into the property will remain the same. Part of it will be on the new property and pa�t on the other property. Ms. Modig asked if this property is going to be sold and have two different owners. Mr. Bolin stated he thought that CSM planned to keep both properties. They have a building on one piece. This would be additional warehouse storage and office space for CSM to lease. Ms. Modig asked that if this going to be within the same company, why do they need a shared driveway agreement? Mr. Bolin stated the City requires this when there are two parcels. At this time, CSM plans to keep both parcels. Since these lots meet the definition of a lot, it is possible in the future they could sell off one of the parcels so they need to record an agreement. If they sell one parcel, the other party could not be denied access to the site. Mr. Kusnierek stated he is the senior architect for the project. CSM is a development and management company. They buy, build, and manage all their buildings. They have rarely sold a building. In 26 years, they have sold finro buildings. They plan to keep this all�together. They also own two buildings to the north and the vacant parcel to the west. They plan to fill up the building, get it going and move on to more. Ms. Savage asked if the petitioner had any problems with the stipulations. Mr. Kusnierek stated he had no problem with the stipulations. For the parking, they will work with staff in order to meet the requirements. 1.08 � • � � i � ' � ' � • ... ' M TI N by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:15 P.M. Mr. Kondrick stated he agreed with Mr. Oquist that a parking requirement should not be pa�t of a replat. Ms. Savage disagreed. It is an added protection. As long as the petitioner has no problem with it and staff feels it is important, she sees nothing wrong with it. Mr. Kondrick stated he is not sure this is a good idea. It is important to discuss it with the petitioner and make sure they are made aware of the requirements. However, in terms of a replat, he was not sure it was appropriate to require parking stalls. Mr. Kuechle stated he thought it should be included. It is part of the package. It is part of the building they are proposing to put on the lot and part of the justification of the replat. This is saying that this is required so that the building that is proposed does not need all kinds of variances tomorrow. This will ensure that does not happen. Mr. Oquist stated he can agree with what they are saying. However, on the other hand, they should then put the same stipulation on the Onan request and for everyone that comes in. He could approve the request either way, but he thought they must be careful. When the request is a replat, then they should deal with a replat. The 131 parking spaces �are a part of the code. They have to have that. When the building is constructed, they will have to deal with it. He thought they must be careful before throwing other things in. Mr. Saba stated that in the case of a replat, the size of the building could change which would make the parlcing a different issue. In this case, he agrees with advising the builder that the parking spaces will be required. Ms. Modig stated she can see both sides. A replat is a replat, and does not have anything to do with the building or with the number of parking spaces it has. The petitioner has agreed it is okay, but this is setting a precedent. If the petitioner is asked for 131 spaces and they put in a building half the size, they would still be required to have 131 parking spaces because it is a requirement of the replat. She does not think it is appropriate at this time. Ms. Savage stated they ce�tainly have the opportunity to discuss the stipulations. As a lawyer, she does not see that the stipulations have to be that narrow. They are, in fact, the judges here and have the discretion to have that. It might be a different matter if there was an objection by the petitioner. She did not think it was a question of precedent setting. Mr. Oquist stated he thought it unusual to put parking requirements in for a replat. Ms. Modig made a good point. If the petitioner puts in a smaller building, would they still be required to provide 131 parking stalls? Mr. Kuechle stated the number is determined by the size of the building. If fewer spaces are required, they could get by with fewer. 1.09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING �ANUARY 6 199� PAGE 10 Mr. Oquist stated the stipulation as it is written does not say that. M TI N by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend approval of Repiat request, #98-05, by CSM Properties, Inc., to replat property on Lot 1, Block 1, Northco Business Park 5th Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, for the development of vacant land, generally located on Northco Drive, with the following stipulations: 1. A guardrail shall be provided befinreen the roadway and retaining wall on the storm water pond. 2. A park dedication fee of $4,605.40 shall be paid before the building permit is issued. 3. Petitioner shall record a shared driveway Access and Maintenance Agreement. 4. Future 71 st Street upgrade Assessment Agreement must be signed and filed with the City prior to the issuance of a building permit for the newly created lot. UPON A VOICE VOTE, WITH KONDRICK, MODIG, SIELAFF, SABA, AND OQUIST VOTING AYE, AND SAVAGE AND KUECHLE VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. Mr. Kuechle stated he is in favor of the project and of the stipulation regarding parking, but had to vote against the entire project based on one stipulation. Mr. Bolin stated the City Council would consider this request on January 25. 3. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 5 1998 PARKS � RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING. M__ OTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the minutes of the October 5, 1998, Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 3 19q� HUMAN RES[�t �Rr g �OMMISSION MEETING: M TI by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to receive the minutes of the December 3, 1998, Human Resources Commission meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 17 1998 ENVIRONMFNTAL ALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING: M TI N by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the minutes of the November 17, 1998, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission meeting. 1.10 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 6, 1999 PAGE 11 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 9. 1998. APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING: MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive the minutes of the December 9, 1998, Appeals Commission meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 3. 1998. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING: MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Ms. Sielaff, to receive the minutes of the December 3, 1998, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. RECEIVE THE DECEMBER 17 1998 HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING: MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to receive the December 17, 1998, Human Resources Commission meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. QTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Oquist stated he noted that Onan was required to pay a park fee and CSM was not. He felt the requirements should be consistent on all requests. Mr. Hickok stated both petitioners will pay a park fee. This is a requirement and is discussed with the developers. Ms. Daniels reviewed with the Commission the systematic code enforcement process, where they are now in the process and the plan for continuing the systematic code enforcement. Mr. Sielaff suggested putting information indicating the code enforcement requirements in the City newsletter. Mr. Saba suggested also putting this information on the City web page as it is developed. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to adjoum the meeting. 1.11 �l � � �l ► • ••• UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE JANUARY 6, 1999, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:53 P.M. Res ectfully submitted, , J ! - Lavonn Cooper �y.� Recording Secretary 1.12 MEMORANDUM PLANNING DIVISION Date: 1 /12/99 � To: William Bums, City Manager �- From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Planning Commission action on P.S. #98-04 M-99-11 INTRODUCTION The City of Fridley has been asked, by N.G. Nelson, Onan Corporation, to replat property on Tracts A-D, RLS 114, generally located at 1400 73'� Avenue NE. The �eplat would accommodate the development of a 400,000 square foot warehousing facility. The plat, with attached stipulations, will meet the standards of the subdivision ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION CTION At the January 6, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for P.S. 98-04. After discussion of past environmental problems on the site, a motion was made to approve the plat request with one addition to StafPs recommended stipulations. The additional stipulation requires Onan to notifjr the City if any contaminants are found on-site. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the plat with 14 stipulations. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the recommendation of the P.lanning Commission and approve P.S. 98-04 as presented, with the additional stipulation. Attachments 12J22198 2.01 City of Fridley Land Use Application P.S. 98-04 January 6, 1998 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Onan Corporation 1400 73`d Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 Requested Action: Replat Purpose: Replat property to accommodate development of a warehouse facility. The number of parcels will remain the same. However, a re-definition of parcel boundaries will occur as a result of this action. Existing Zoning: M-2, Heavy Industrial Location: 1400 73rd Ave. NE Size: 5,357,880 square feet 123 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: SF/MF Mix & R-1, R-3 E: City of Mounds View S: Multi-Family & R-3, M-2 W: Medtronics & M-2 • Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Use of property is consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Proposed use of property is in conformance with Ordinance. Zoning/Land Use History: The Onan plat was platted into current configuration in 1988 to create separately described parcels for the contaminated portion of the property in order to clear the title for the parcel containing the Onan facility. Legal Description of Property: Tracts A-D, RLS 114 Council Action: January 25, 1999 Public Utilities: Available near site. Transportation: Property is accessible from the north on 73`a Ave., from the south on 69`" Ave., and by a rail line running through the property. Physical Characteristics: Land is relatively flat, covered by tall grasses, small oaks, and popple trees. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The current preliminary plat was submitted in order to accommodate a new 406,000 square foot warehouse south of the existing Onan facility. The Onan property is currently split into four Tracts. The current Tract A is an area used as a containment site for the previous environmental concerns. Tract B was created to accommodate a planned building that never materialized and also contains a"french drain" system from past environmental clean up. Tract C has the largest land area and includes the existing Onan buiTdings. Tract D was created to provide public right-of-way to Tract B, once developed. The preliminary plat contains 3 lots, a public right-of-way, and an outlot. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS Ciry Staff recommends approval of the subdivision division for a replat. The newly defined lots, with staff stipulations, will meet the code definition of a lot in an M-2 zoning district, except for Outlot A, which is to be used as a storm water holding pond. Staff recommends this approval be granted with stipulations. Staff stipulations are found on the following pages. Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin 2.02 • •. �, ANALYSIS Hi o The parcels were platted in their current configuration in 1988. The purpose for the 1988 plat was to create separately described parcels for the. contaminated portion of the property in order to clear the title for the parcel containing the Onan facility. By separating the contaminated parcels, the assessed value of the Onan property would not be affected by the lower value of the contaminated parcels. The previous owner of this property, Minnesota & Ontario Paper Company (which became Boise Cascade), had established a telephone pole and railroad tie creosote treatment facility which involved a dipping process on Tract A and a drying process on Tract B. in 1984, it was discovered that this portion of the property was contaminated due to the creosote operation. Boise Cascade, Onan Corporation, and ttie railroad constructed a slurry wall containment system in an effort to clean up the property and comply with a court order and MPCA requirements. In 1988, it was viewed as unlikely that Tract A would ever be developed due to the extent of contamination, but that Tract B may be developable in the future. In order to clear the title and stabilize the value of the Onan facility (Tract C), Onan separated the contaminated parcels from the rest of the site. All of the Tracts, except Tract D, meet the lot requirements found in the zoning code. In 1988, it was noted that Tract D did not meet the zoning requirements because it's purpose was to provide access to Tract B, if and when it was ever developed. The plat � was approved with the following stipulations: 1. Tract D shall be dedicated to the City for street purposes prior to the issuance of a building permit for Tract B. if Tract D cannot be used for roadway purposes due to NSP facilities on the easement, Onan shall dedicate a 60 foot street easement to the City on Tract C which would provide access to Tract B. 2. That stipulation 1 and 3 shall be filed of record. 3. That Tract D is unbuildable. 4. A park dedication fee will be charged for Tract B at the time a building permit is issued. Current Reauest The current preliminary plat was submitted in order to accommodate a new 406,000 square foot warehouse, partly on what was Tract B just south of the existing Onan facilities. The warehouse, located on what is now called Lot 3 of the proposed plat would be owned by Murphy Warehouse Company with approximately 60-65% of the space leased to the Onan Corporation. The majority of the space leased by Onan would be occupied by operations currently located in Murphy's Main Street Warehouse. The move would create efficiencies for Onan. 2.03 The Onan property is currently split into four different Tracts. The current Tract A is an area used as a containment site for the previous environmental concerns. Tract B was created to accommodate a planned building that never materialized and also contains a "french drain" system from past environmental clean up. Tract C consists of the largest portion of the site, including existing Onan buildings. Tract D was created to provide public right-of-way to Tract B, once developed. The preliminary plat contains 3 lots, a public right-of-way, and an outlot. On the preliminary plat, Lot 2 is identical to the existing Tract A. Lot 3 will contain the new warehouse building, and due to the proposed building size, the eastern boundary of Lot 3 is approximately 410' east of the eastern boundary of what was Tract B. Lot 3 measures approximately 26 acres, whereas Tract B was approximately 16 acres. The new warehouse is larger than the building previously planned ten years ago when the parcels were originally platted. The new warehouse has been designed and located so that it will not impact the "french drain". The new public right-of-way will serve the right- of-way function originally intended for Tract D, but has been moved to the north to better accommodate future development. The location of the new public right-of-way created an outlot on the new plat, labeled Outlot A. A portion of the proposed stormwater detention pond will also be located on Outlot A. Lot 1 will contain the current Onan buildings and all remaining site area. As with the Sam's Club / Bachmans plat, staff recommends that the proposed outlot be combined with Lot 1. Though it is physically separate from Lot 1, due to the new roadway, it should be considered as part of Lot 1. This would eliminate the potential for the outlot to become tax forfeit and a future problem. As for the railspur, a private easement agreement is planned to ensure that the existing railspur, which passes directly through the Murphy Warehouse, will accommodate use by the Onan Corporation as well. The lot requirements in the M-2 district require a lot area of at least 1.5 acres, a lot width of at least 150' on a public right-of-way, and a maximum lot coverage of 40% for one story buildings. Lot 3 has a lot area of 25.99 acres and a lot coverage of 36%, but in the preliminary plat does not have 150' of lot width along a public right-of-way. A stipulation will be added requiring the public right-of -way be extended a minimum of 150' along the eastern edge of Lot 3. In all other ways, the proposed subdivision meets all of the lot requirements, except for Outlot A, which is to be used as public right of way. RECOMMENDATIONS City Staff recommends approval of the subdivision division for a replat. The new lots, with stipulations, will meet the code definition of a lot in an M-2 zoning district, except for Outlot A, which is to be used as public right of way. Staff recommends this approval be granted with the following stipulations. 2.04 STIPULATIONS Following are the stipulations requested by City Staff, to be placed upon the property, for approval of the proposed plat: 1. A 20 foot utility easement should be provided along the easterly property line of the Onan property. 2. A road with 60 foot right-of-way, 30 mph. Curves, and necessary cul-de-sacs or bubble should 6e identified to provide access to the proposed lot splits. 3. The proposed access road will continue along the eastern edge of Lot 3 for a minimum of 150' in order to meet the lot width requirements. 4. The sewer services should be designed to service the proposed and future lots on the plat. 5. Sewer connection to the MCES interceptor will require MCES approval. 6. The water system should be designed to provide service to the existing and proposed lots. 7. Fire hydrants associated with the development will be flushed by City crews. Operation, maintenanc� and repair will remain with the property owners. 8. Storm water pond calculations need t ebecuted to nclude the outfall'systDem fornthet 9. A storm pond agreement needs to be pond. 10. A user fee will be required from the property owner for the storm system pfaced within the City right-of-way. 11. The storm water outlet pipe will require the repair of Stinson Avenue and the installation of B618 concrete curb and gutter. 12. The storm sewer pond design must be approved by the Rice Creek Watershed District. 13. Petitioner shall combine Outlot A with Lot 1, for tax purposes, before final plat is approved. 14. Petitioner shall notify the City of any contaminants that surface, for wellhead protection. 2.05 � City of �''_� Fridley 0 Z W C�. W J � R-, - a,e �;y u� 0 R-2 - Tvw Far►ily Uivts [� R-3 - C�,ener-al MYtipe Urrts 0 R�d - Mobile I-brre Parks � PUD - Rarxied Unit DeveloFxrier# � S1 ' I-yde ?aic P1agFibor}�oo� � �Z - �ed�aprn�t DisUid C] G1 - L.oral Busir� 0 G2 - C�ner-al Busir�ss � G3 - C�,ene-al Sho�ping � GR1- C�al qfice Community Development Department Subdivision Replat Notification ; , � � �' t � I---� � � � � � � � � nMi - � i�a� 0 11�42 - FieavY IndusUial N _ AM3 - Outcbor Irtersioe Fleavy Indistrial 0 P - Rrqic FadliUes =�� Subdivision Replat PS - 98 - 04 ,�,�,,,�� 1400 73rd Ave. NE �� Onan Corporation SOlN�OeS: Frnidle�y GIS�� Andca Co� ap� Se,ssiny I c�r�r oF F�o��r 6431 UNIVERSlTY AVENUE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (612) 57t-3450 � COMMUNt7Y DE'l/ELOPMENT DEPARTMENY SUQrDIV1Si�N aPPLiC�4TION FOR: Plat __ Lot Spilt PROPERTY INEORMATION: - site plan requited t� submlttel, see attached Address: I4c:•G -t 3�� Av� ��1 �.. Property Identification Number. � h�.Icw tegal Description: Lat Block _w___ TracUAddition Tz,� �rs r� - o ��s � t� Current Zoning; r� Z Square footage/acrea�e: � Z3 a�Yes Reason for Subdivision: � 1- r _ C�CCc�1��tilc t� deJ�lot.xre�� C'� ��A�eX�e�)S2 -�c+[.�1 tu -- -� Have you operated a business fn e city which required a business ticense? Yes No _� If Yes, which city7 If Yes, what type of business? Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No � �r.r��rtitititititir4AMrA.w11�r �V�/^I�vw�1rM��y1bIM/VtiAr1Y�Y�YwI�M�Y�V'�M��w.,A�tiyA/n/�yr�tirvqr/1+�r�Y�V FEE Q�NER INFQ MA710N (as it appears an the property title) (Contract purcttasers: Fee owners must sign this form prior to processing) NAME: Cncv� �Y��ti�,n ADORESS: I � �� ► I`'1 ��l DAYT{ME PHpNE: c��-��--soc;o SIGN TURElQATE: tiNN^NV V�V'r•�r4ti�w+A�tiA1tiVNAr�V�V�Y�Y1�tirtiY��r�rrwrr�v�v^r�rti�'v'�r AAr/Vqr�1�Vw'M�r�I� PET1TiONER INFORMATION NAME: „ rne ADaRESS: DAYYIME PNONE: CDta-s��+-�1�� SIGNATUREJOATE: FEE Plat: �500.00 for 20 Lots. 315.0o tor each edditionas Iot Total Fee: ��_____� ;�? Lot Split: �250.00 Receipt #: /� Received By. Application Numbe . �'y6 -0 +� ' Schedu{ed Planning Corrtmission Date: l2! !� � g8 Scheduled Ciiy Council Date: ,,,,,_ �/��_ �, 10 Day Applicatlon ComplotQ Notification Dat�: 60 a�y pate: T�F�c. ► A R i z 30 2�{- �F3 0002 i R�c. � t3 Gz� Z 30 2� y� 3�0 3 T2�C.7 �- R-� 2��-p24 y-I C�00 Z ( Q..i�C, l�� 21 Z.�-0 Z`{' `'l'..t '�pp � 2■07 FROM :�PUS �: OPUS. 1)ecembcr 3U, 199fi TO . Opw Northw�� Construedoe Corpontion Upw Corporo�c Centcr 1Q�50 Pnni Raaci West MinnaMnka. Minnnul�a !�.id 3 t;ti.�,�.aaaa Mr. 1'r�l�l Holin c�ty otF��y Municipal Gcnler b431 lJniversity Avcnuc Nls Pridlcy, MN 55432 ltl:: 1'roPOSCd 011illl I)CVCI��rment. 73`d and Cenlral /lvcnue l�ridlcy, Mi�inesot� l )ear 1'at�l: 612 571 1297 1996.12-30 11:40AM �615 P.01/02 Meilinp AdAtass P.U. �ox 59t 10 Miiuie�ryKdiy, hlinmr�dx �9eh5�0110 Faa 612�656 4,29 VlA }�'AC:�1M11.C: $7J-12$7 l�m writiii� witli tl�� nurP<�se of providins you w�tf� sotnc back�ra�ind iiiformntion o�i tlac proposcd On�n Jcvcic�Pmcnt at 73`� �nd Ccntral in l�ridlcy. It is my undcrsi�nding that this infarmation �n�ty bc uscfi�l to thc T'Ic�lllllll� CO�rlmiti`iUn E�)]d t�1C City COUIICII in cvaluetin�; thc rrcliminary pl�t subiiiitlbl. The prcliminary ��lat iti �uhmittcd in order to flccoii�tuodatc a ncw 40G,000 Sl� warcl�ousc buildin� on �hc land south c�f thc cxisting Unan facilities. 1`hc warehousc buildin6, loc�tcd ai 1.�� a�,r��,� r�•oposed riat, would bc uwncd hy MurPhy Warchousc Company with annroxim�tcly GO-GS°/a c�f th� �raced leased to On1n Corpora�icm. '1'he remainder of thc sracc would be utili�cd by MurPhy WFirehousc Coinpa»y as part of their ncn•mal warchousii�� busincss. 'l�li� �najarity of 11�e sp�ce lelsed by Unan w��►ulc] h� occupicd by oper�tions currcnlly lc�caicd in Mt�rphy W�rchousc's Nc�rlhlawn buildings ncar Main Slr�ct and �1S►�h /1vCilUC in l�ridJcy. Thc movc tu the proposcd ncw warchouse would cicarly cr�atc cfficicncic� for Unan Corporatioi� ur,t uc;n today, C.urrcntly thc Onai� pru�x:rty ic split into four �rcas, or traclti. 'I'rdc;t "A" is an area utiliT,cd as 8 C��nlainment Structure associfllcd with prcviaus c:��vironmcntal cleanup efforis. '1'ract "T3" was created to eicconimodate a Planned buildin� development that iicver m�iterifili�ed. Also, a"frcnch drain" syst��n a.�c�ei�tcd witli prcvi�us cnvironmental cicanu� cfli�rGc i� cantaincd within Tract "13". '1'rac;t "1)" w�s crc�tcd with thc intcnt of providii�g Puhlic; ri�ht-af-way to Tracl "13", although it is my undc�stlnding thal it was nevcr recorded as rublic rigl�t-of-way. 1'intally, Tr�ci "C" conl.ainecl the remainder o}'the site, i�tcluding tl�c cxistin� Onan huildin�s. � 7'he prelimin�ry pl�t rropo�es three lots, a rublie righi-of-way, and an c�ullot. Lot 2 is identic�l to tl�c cxistiiig '1'ract "A". Lot 3 conittit�s the proposcd warehatise buitdin�. lluc ta thc tii•r.e c�i'the buildins, tl�e e�stern boundary uf Lui :3 is �rpro�imntcly 410' cast of tl�e cd��ern houndary of 7'ract "II", I.ot 3 mcasum.s apprc�ximately 26 acres, �vherc�►s'1'ract Ard�ilncls, GmU�ctrns, Or.vnlopt!�x ��0� . . . .... . ._.. _.._ _ .. . . . . .......... ... . .... �,�. Opus No�Unvcst CunsUuction Cv��uialiun is un ulpliete uf tIK Opus group M tOmpaMes Atlenle, Austi�i. BeUevue. Chicago. Colun�tNY, Dnllex, On�rv��r, ft tauAardalc. Hauston. InCfanapolis. Kansas Ciiy, Miami, Milwaukr.c. Minneapolis. U�angc Ca,nty. Pensacala. Phocnix, fortland. Sacromcnto. S�n froncisco. Scanlc. Tampa. Washirtnlmi D C. FROM �OPUS TO • 612 571 129? 1999.12-30 11:40AM �615 P.02/02 � oPUS. Mr.1'aul �olin i�ccemhcr 30. 1998 1'agc 2 of 2 "I3" is approximatcly 1 G acres. Agair�, �hu increase in size is duc to thc incr��sca pro��osed dcvel��n�ent over wh�t was p�cviously plannecl. l� i� imrc�rlant to note thai the ncw warclu7us� huilclin�� hf�s bccn dcsigucd so as to not �dv�rsely i:r_�act thc cxistinp "frcnch drt�in" systcm mcntiaied in thc rrevic�u� Para�;r�Ph. The new public ri�;ht-Uf-w�y scrves the samc J�urrose �s '1'r�tct "ll", Uut has bccn rclocatecl t� the north ta bettcr ��ccamn,odate fi�turc dcvcioprncut on the e;ast end of Y.ot 1. l'he locntion of'the l�ulilic rifiht-ot-w�y crcatcs an outic,t, lahc:lcd OuQc�t "A" on tlic prclimin�ry plat. A pvrtiw� �f thc pro�oscd stoctttwater detent.i�n cy�(ems lies itt Uutlot "A". 1.ot 1 gcncrally c�irretiPemds tc� 'I'ract "C"' of the existin�; site, whiclt is to say il�al il cc�nldins lhr eurrent Unaii l�uildin�� anJ all remaining �itc area. A unicluc site fc�turc that may bc of inlerest is the existing railsrur that passes throuPh the proposed tiew wF�rcho«se �ind continucs north t� the existin� Onan buildin6. '1'hi� railsj��ir is currently existin� ht�t h�s �iot been used foc mnny ycars. it has heen desi�;nc�d tc� �cco�llmod�lc usc by bi�t}t Qnan C:cirPc�ration and Murphy W�rehouse in the new war�l�ousc builJinb, as wcll as usc by Onan C:orror�tion in tlicir cxistinfi f�cility. Si�,cc usc at thc cxisting (>nan buiidine oi1 I.ot 1 would requirc acccss throu�h lh� »cw huilciin�; o» l.ot 3, a Privnic c�scmcnt aFcc�u�cnt is plauncct. I 1�oPc tl�c infi�rmalicm nbove is hclp�itl. 11'you are in need of �dditional info��mf,tion <�r clarification oi�tlic �bovc, p]ca��; clon'l hesi�atc to c�ntact me at C12/GSC�-45�1i. Sii�ccrcly, OPUS N01t7'11W1:51' C'ONSTrtlJC:7�I�N CC)2t1'(:)ltn'17UN ,. '1'homas ]t.l3eck�r ilxst�ciate T'roject M�n��cr c; llavc 13angasscr, Opus Woody Nclson, Onan. Rich�rd Murphy, Jr., Murphy Warchousc Company 2.09 r . � �; � ��i 0 t :e�_'- � O ` WT� v 1 � 0 � � � � � � 3� � ��1� i �� i� � �� . � �aoa �� ! Q � Q � � � 3 , �� i a � � p � $ � �� ! � ,#� � � 4 m �Ej�� a � ��i � �,�� ad� e ��I � i iili �j << ; ��II,l;�li�l��i;ittlti� ��i:�,i!l�f1��li �dl.ri7lni��lh�.uu: i n.�hid4d. � i�i� � s "�i! � � i: i i ��,� a .J �;i� ;�� .� ��i� ,.,,,.. Q ii�! ' � , j;6ilil1ii�li��l�i��{i�i�� s.11u/u (1. .dl.� .��If��.l . ■ 1��i I�,lli(�i�� li�t,i if��il��ii!;I til�� i� `1 `ll��s�;�,�� I'u1i11�ilil�� i�,c �;��tt . �.��.��,..��..,.� �.�.��.�,,.�� ,��.��,, �,.l.l,,,,,,,,,.�„� J�� cd�td�ldi�..t.t�. • ! p!� �i19 ��0 �� , �� ao'��' . � �i� i � � �� :� � a� �g �g �g �4 �� 4� � - �- � �. � � �,� �__. L �. °' 2.10 r �� • � 1 ��, � �� O � ! j � j�'�;� � � il�: � ;�;} i �ft!1�1� g� � ---- 2.11 � r I ��: 1 rI�'1 � �'� '`.�` ,'� ( � � . c► t ;�� ;��a �r � ,�f.6.� , ' a; i i�i ��.,.i. � �� . _-�-�-� � . -J 1i � :�� — -�_-- ,� � �, � , � --- � � ' -- ,� % �� I \ / �\ � i � �� -- -- -- -- _� / � ' �� I �,` `� �I: � � \\� �1', — �. I',�Il� i` ``I j��I � r / i� 1�_ . �` � :I� —♦ 1 � �� / � :1 : � � / I �l / � ♦ . �. 1 / � � � � \ \ r �� =� ..-�, , o, �l.s � , r�r ,; ��' ` ��) :.:� I t � 1 ��\ � ,'�� . � ��'} ^�\� � � � � ��. � / ',-_%�, _ _ _ _ _' --y' � ♦ � ; _ � ��j = _ � ` _ i _ = _ - N J , _ =_ _ ' ' _ _ - 1 . --�_=•�---- - :.uV � � ,,: � - ; � �� , , � � � -� - �� , !�� ,;,� `� '�'a��y ,��{, , , � I�,,��,�YJI�SV� j ��II FJ' 1 �' a; �� i � �11 � II 1 � II I 1 �l1 I� 1 � �� p / Ij 1 / � �� / I ` �'� 1 � I \` �i�� 1 I i�� I � �i: � Z � _ �� N � � �t o � �� i iin W � �� `i � �� i m ` �� ,�� 5:► o ; � ; >� �, � \ , � �, i i i f � � �i �� ,��-` ; '-' ��' � `, a � ; ` � , , ��,�� , �� , � � �� , a � � � , �� , , , , , ,�� , , , � " � �� , i �, `, � - � .;: s - -� - _ �_ �___��l��c� -� - `Q�� 1 �� __' � . �, --- , ii��I�� i �,L �� ; �� .� �� i� � , � � � , .� .; � E!: �� ! ,;��; �l� '�_% ��1 �. °��, '11 � i �, ry, , , i � � �, �/� l� ,�i I � , ,�% .' i i� �. r ` /*� I � � i �� I I � i� ` % � �'•`• � � ' � "•i I C� �i ��`� '�/�� /4;' I I — � � �� ' � / �` �� _ , i � �/ / I ; c�•. i � � q i�! �, % i ��/ afi�/ � - '� � � � �� /'�l � ' //�/ /;�F e i �J��L' I i� i I I.� // t ; � I �, t� � � i � � I .� � � �1 ��j _ �� ' � � � � ' I I t i /� � - i. � ' ''� �i I � �.',.� il i �� i ."'-"�"i' // // I �bl '_�' // / ':� _ ,' ; � //,'I�1 � II � �� ll , �� ; �'�% � �`" j �'I ,+ , , I n%, ;�-� �� l� j � I � , , /� � ( � �// ) / � i i �i ' /i � � i � +/ � I I i / j �/ j I ( / � � /� I I I /-�i �� I � �� I i -; /,` � ji� , %� i j�I �� I /' r � � I � i' � I /� � �i �� 1 ��, .': � 2.12 ~ J � ��; ; i�.� l��1 q•..;� i i � �'�a�i f ,il�ifl� 2.13 �r � e � � �' � ! i;1; ;��f� , � _� � �� ,�i,�.� � �, � � i �i�� =�u� ! � 1 �if.i.l. t � 1. � � . . :.o—�Q R i 2.14 . �-- � f �j�! j ��'t 0 = i�� ;Ik� _ �--�Q C� � ,--==•r- � , �� %�a� -� -.� i� I liil �it�i�l ti/� ci ' �� ' �� NH �� , � � -�'� - i� :-_ =- -�-+�+V-+1�� '� I I� ' � , � ' �%�//�� "' `,l_ I II� //� � �. -J� �Ij� � e� � � _ � � I _ [��' . � � . - ,►// r � r�� l�t� _. - - __ ..� =�/ - = i �i,)7��i!��`�� "/ / i/ �1 �� _ _ - - � �� , � ��' �. � �� / ' - - i� �; � .. �� /��I(��F� . � �: � �� - \, ��_ '_ '��F�_ �� i�U� ,: „--�-��i„ ' �:: ,�. � , I(p!II � �� ► � '�, � � �� r ,;il i,,� �,,;q�;� � �_ �� ` � - .I;'� �� =i .� ;�./ � �-= : � ,� � �i �I% � � , �� ., � e i;'�� ,� , . � �� - I� ��.,, � ,� �__� .�. �� =�-�•� ��.� .r r, � ' i_ �� •� � �q% % �� - - - '� _ _ - �,�� .,� �-;� � � ,� r: � , n"' � �� '1� * ji' ,�� ;; , � _ ,. � � , � , ..��,,� fr �\„ � � � � % 1' �--� � `` - � �„ � ♦ ;� — �E �� _ ��_ / • � � �r��+!►`. �.� T -- �� - = �. ----�---�._ - ;� _= ,=��_. _ � -_ �•J � � -----� 2. 17 �� O Oi � G 1� li II II �I J� �� 1 � � � Q 1 r�i i�l� t� �1� e�i � � � � %/ /� , ' /� / �� / /� / /� % // / � � . , a � � � � 2.18 — �J O � 0 � � � � *�—t— - — � `_ -- � �- -- �-- -- r-- - -- �-- -- �--- —a--- -- t � � -- � -- � � � � Q ��1 i�l� 1� � 1� e� � 2.19 - . -- � . MEMORANDUM PLAI�TNING DIVISION Date: 1 /12/99 To: Wiiliam Bums, City Manager m� +� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Planning Commission action on P.S. #98-05 M-99-10 INTRODUCTION The City of Fridley has been asked, by Dave Carland, CSM. Properties, to replat property on Lot 't``, Block 1, Northco Business Par1c 5�' Addition, generally located at Northco Drive. The replat would accommodate the development vacant land for warehouse / office space. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION At the January 6, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for P.S. 98-05. After much discussion over StafPs recommended stipulation, #1, requiring the petitioner to keep the required number of parking stalls on-site and usable, a motion was made by Mr. Kondrick and seconded by Ms. Modig to recommend approval of the replat without the parking stipulation. The motion passed on a 5-2 vote. Mr. Kuechle and Chairperson Savage indicated they were in favor of the project and of the stipulation regarding pa�lcing, but voted against the entire project because this stipulation was removed. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends that the City Council approve P.S. 98-05 as originally recommended, with stipulation #1. 3.01 City of Fridley Land Use Application D c QR.n� January 6, 1998 �;FNERAL INFORMATION Applicant: CSM Properties, Inc. 2575 University Ave. W. Suite 150 St. Paul, MN 55114 �tequested Action: iZeplat �urpose: iZeplat a portion of the Northco Business Park 5`� Addition property to accommodate development of vacant land. One additional parcel will be created by this action. Existing Zoning: M-2, Heavy Industrial �.ocation: l�torthco Drive Size: 200,233 square feet 4.6 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant. �urrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Warehouse & M-2 E: Kwik File & M-2 S: Willamette & M-2 W: Vacant & M-2 Comp. Plan Conformance: Use of properiy is consistent with Plan Zoning Ord. Conformance: Proposed use of property is in conformance with Ordinance. Zoning / Land Use History: Northco Business Park was originally platted in 1989. The 2°d and 3"d Additions were platted in 1990 and redefined the original lot configuration to accommodate specific building needs. The . 4`� Addition further defined the parcels along the east side of Northco property in December 1993. In 1994 Northco Business Pazk Sth Addition was approved to create the current configuration. SPECIAL INFORMATION Legal Description o1 rroperry: Part of Lot 1 Block 1 Northco Business Park 5t° Add. Council Action: January 25, 1999 Public Utilities: Available along Northco drive. Transportation: Access to the property is gained by Northco Drive. Physical Characteristics: Northem edge of property is flat and covered by oak and popple trees. South part of property is flat and covered by tall grass. SUMMARY OF RE�UEST Petitioner is seeking to replat parcel, by splitting Lot 1, Block 1, Northco Business Pazk 5`� Addition, to allow for the development of another warehousing facility. SL;f�vI1V1ARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this subdivision plat request with the following stipulations: 1. The required 131 parking spaces shall be on- site and usable. 2. A guazdrail shall be provided between roadway and retaining wall on storm water pond. 3. A park dedication fee of $4,605.40 shall be paid before building pemut is issued. 4. Petitioner shall record a shared driveway Access and Maintenance Agreement. 5. Future 71S` Street upgrade Assessment Agreement must be signed and filed with the City prior to the issuance of a building permit for the newly created lot. Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin 3.02 ��I�� ANALYSIS His The Northco site has had an active history of subdivision lot splits dating back to 1989 when the original plat was approved. The proposed plat will be the 6"' revision in the Northco development. The properties were originally platted as an industrial park and have needed to change size and shape as new tenants with new land needs moved in. The parcels were platted in their current configuration in 1994. The purpose for the 1994 plat was to create Lot 1 and Outlot A, so that Outlot A could be sold to the Dayton-Hudson Corporation (Target). Currenf Request The petitioner is seeking to replat, by splitting Lot 1, Block 1, Northco Business Park 5th Addition, to allow for the development of an office/warehouse facility. The lot requirements in the M-2 district require a lot area of at least 1.5 acres, a lot width of at least 150 feet, and a maximum lot coverage of 40% for one-story buildings. Both lots in the proposed subdivision will meet all lot requirements. The proposed new building is 4.6 acres, has over 150 feet of I�t width, and the proposed building will cover only 32% of the lot. The remaining lot which contains the Kwik-File business also conforms to the ordinance. RECOMMENDATIONS City staff recommends approval of this subdivision plat request with the following stipulations: STIPULATIONS 1. The required 131 parking spaces shall be on site and usable. 2. A guardrail shall be provided befinreen the roadway and retaining wall on storm water pond. 3. A park dedication fee of $4,605 shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. The petitioner shall record a shared driveway Access and Maintenance Agreement. 5. A future 71 St Street upgrade Assessment Agreement must be signed and filed with the City prior to issuance of a building permit for the newly created lot. 3.03 � u� ��s . :L- �z : : i 3' _ a �, J � = �_ iu ., = r, � > � 'l. r-� O .� r :J > 'i _ ~ ii �_ �� oa zf � ,� : r � .5 � r S � � ! 3 = • i � �z� :�� : �� f L ; ; � 0 ..� 7- C) -- ^—' u � ;_ c�i� = F�i f � 0 .� C3 'J . v� .—.� ? :=� u � � �Q^ n VJ� o; ::. � � �3i i s= °'� i i o �. G�� U �� i � � z a� � � v > I� � � I M � � I "� � I � � � � � � F--i � O � U �� O � � z�� c� � � � Q� � .� � � � O � �a�. ^�l ; W � Uw � .c O � z� ; � ; i � I � Y L � ? � � = �� C � y O ,� � �� ,—�, �' Q �� .. y � V Q � v� � ? N N � .-. m �� 8 �: �' 0 �� e 'O Y E m o,� :° � p Q v G C �, C � N 3 � °� � i �li i i �� . -ir�'�i Q �O O n b !, C v��i � i � �. �� , a�mS:Bu�^s3 J L _ � ' ,�n �� I', ,Iil ��,i !!i `il�ll:i'Ili I � . , ' _�.—: I �� — -- -�-• ---�-- - - —.._� -�- --- � --..--- ---------- � � � � � � \ .� \ � � ��,� : I i I ��•� IIIIII , ,,,�_...�..5 ax,�,a ' � � � ' - - _ _; --: --- _ -_.._._.._._.—_.—�.—..7.- �. __ — _ . ' �a - "'� =_.. .__ .. .. . _ _._._. _ � . �. --. ��.,_ —s- _--.—._" � � I � :� : - - - - - — --- — —" i f � - . � I � I � I ��j��1 ' '. I . � i � � � i � � � I �s o: � X'^ � � � �8 � � �� .f� P -�. : ; :�� , �� °�' � � I I !I��6 � ' °�.. ',�.. , //�. � �� I I f I I I I�I I I I I I I . pu4l uw�ooatl �ur.uu+oi5 Pn°d°'d � _ , �/^ � C � 0 j .y 3� �"' � = G.2 i o �� 3� � U � ! i � � w I z � � � � � � > � �. M � «S � O a� � Q � O : � � � Zw x � � � a� .� M� 1�-1 � i � ' � ' � � ( zN / J� l, �� , � � � � � '�V W� � W� � � � q � � � � � � � C � � � � � � i 3 a � ��i E�.�ii1,�,; ;�,' , 111itti�,9�1��Ii� 1 � �jiaijr.i�O�i I � I I 1 � � �� s� � � 8$8 � a � �� ss ��° '" � , ii, �� ' �� i t �� i � A i � $ bl -Q� � '' � _� � ` o s�riatia• •r�arrra ..... �as �a: d 0 ss�,.;�r.e .,.,r�_a.,,. � t � __ < ' ,... . ..' I � r � .� � > , + .�.�. � w ! < �cuc T � �- y�_'_ _ �� n � Y in aaw. suso i / . — _. i �/ i , ± � � � � ! � / _ �t � � �i �� / v J ,1 � � � p ` O •'� \ \ � � � ^ e C V v fi � � y ij 3.06 U c� .� c� � �� V � �( 4. u � 0 � N A � m � � g : . ep �� .,. ,,. . ..:.�. �` Y�Y Yif i� YYyY71y �a�f rav n :7:ft! 6 FFFff� E Ii7 7:f 77 :sis�v � .:_ !!Y 8 �• tY:::: �•' � � �pA t. � i j �3� #o� � � � i'i�� EB� W p" '�� 3: � :� � .'-!o �a�� ;� ��ta ��,� � = Y� �� s � '�� '�� u � , i � �� j � � � g� � � ��t ��°' � E� Ait z �.. � 7j � ii� °.a� �iI �lisi,i a �@e �� a � ::i �SEE �s ci ..s:aa 0�a.. . • . � \\ __I \ � I � � ^�q n 1 u `\ \ � � � \ \ . �� :: .� .., �, � .� �� .� z ; •c 4 �' �� i �M� � �y � i� ��3a . ,� h�F�� 1 • 3t �=i f c. i � ��, � � �' � , _- �i� x� � �' o� ...:��t��i.....,.... ....�.... �; � ................................. 44 ; Ill�i{�i�i�i� i� � � �_�1--- _ �------- — — — �=��1 I I � ri -�--------- - i4 -- � �� 'I c� T% ._.�..—.—.—..--. �R cc �X �� 1 � I c � �'� �� 1 1 � , / rc ��` � � 1 . �) ` ' o•cM ��ooa �aaro� . �a io �oua C ,_ / � rt �� ` �'�� : 0'lLY � 1�DOV 16M1 � . . _ �. `ls e �i // I � •C � � � '•�_-•-_�� .,�� :i�� ` i��i��\i�\��.�� +� 1 � �,fII r, y�e� � �r� � . ��.�- - ' °_• 'r� C. r � • �� ;i�!.�'~ `a_,��iir '� �� ►� �. +x��... r �i _ �� `��l�� t"�::' ~� .► ;/, ►a�is �• •+ \ � — — — � j i i / :� �� i .: \� , . � \ U � � 3.07 � g . N � W � S � d � i � � 0 � 1 I � �! 11 t i � t � � t n � I i �",�i,� jt i i� ��,' ��, l�,. 3 � ��t, E� i i}�13,��;� 4h ' ��'; ��tt� ��'.��s; :�� - .J ! � � � 0e� 8� ��i ` r � � �g' =1€ �: i � i r �,,,yyyi �{ ; �' R:,�e .�[ � �, �� I �, � �a� i =� . �- �` t�� E9� �:e �, t� �:, „t I �I �i�e p z� :, �� ,,,� � � i ��i�" �e�� `L c ( E�I,J ��M� a� � y � `i�T � E.� � , 3 <� i 3 � �"� �z ; : � -- I 1 r I ; �• §�- � e d =` t � 1 i � �� - �' 1! `- '` �� r�� •��pi �t s ,� a. B 3E � '�� t�d ` !� <, °. � �! �'!_ ?�� _., :.,.. � - B� .` � ��r �� s� �76 �� ` �Q� l - �• �78 e� Q o �a� ....%_; ._�_�J i-� �►�� ;�;; -\ • =�3 `�:•,.;_• '/ - 3' , - - - -- . _.� ; . �� — �G � ' _ - - - - - �" -J - � �� , - - - �!� :�.= -- ., ; - � a � : _ �� '•I -�I� s ',�� 'F, �� 'ti �fi I _ ,.. �-. . � Z ' ' — - i ' ,.'- O ' , ° i �' �� ` � o�a � !t ,t . � ^ � . ` . �. ; � ! i '-- ..'� `,\ ' r �� E. i � , . ___, , �� o � _ ''_��`'.4 ,.` ; �.-. ' �. , � i LL .��,` •.t`' � �j� :� t � . � 1 � �.s � `,,, q ` ti �� ` / i Z . ,`�`��''�� \ � '�' � � � f I � O ' � +.,. �,�'��' ! i ' U , .,,::,y.`0.. \ �` ..:. ....: � ,y '� �K[� N�`�• � � O � �� ` \ � z $ � i s o ts�i; �et'paa t- — „-i;;irfT!-9� ----- --3 : U� �j°'� � i 8 �•�� 1 . —..�� k i S i,� O S I"f�t��lilf1' �' ' � s . � � a o a�B;� e��d - � y fl!ll��;'i � � �aarce:iiait - � � - J �r\ �� 1l,•�� I - I fI � l : � '' � � d ;� - I � . � ''^ � � � t y i �� j __ i �� ....................._��T' � ;�i � - - - - - - - - - ... � ..�� ... ,. ..... �I��I� � .' p - �,��i��l'1 , �' „i — - `. a+ ,� '+ � —t' � .., 1 0 �, � �, � — " j �; j ! . !t . !t � t! _. � '� � � 1 [ s7Kl0o OMOVOI� 1Nw JD r1011oY ,C � t t `- s�000 • wov �cw o•�co - wo� �y U . � .�".:.:i '• O q' re s�, ! � � _ , a.� � m � _ •c �� _ . 'v i �l � i <: � �1 !� e !t � �L.. � �., i� � ` ! ': �I `j� � .� �,. ; .' � �ll �' Y• i � !" ; �1� . `• ' ' / ( ' tl� � ±�'':t, '% %i' , � C� �� !il .'� � �� = �� : e �. �� - , • �� '� �. �< r.j �t � ,�o j�� i !�f !_ �'!,�\ <> f�a { .l � ��jc � �i� � —I F-, � � s �� --� � � ! � t� 5 dt i i : !' �� I I � �'� ------ �.�, �a �� il�— . � �. � - � �I �� , • �. � • r� _ � � , �I i . 9,. � v� � �: i O �� E � w q � :; •c � , �� 4 q �•i ` �6 � i :� U i� a � i `° � �� rr Q� � � � c� _. • ;� c � � � ��p� y 1` ,_ �� " Q �% g G r cc a. � �_�� ; � � �� _ . - r + � ' .:� � i Y � -- --_`_=.� ��• � -� � I' Z � H U � oc � � Z O U 0 � O Z � f oi*!;a a;at o ;1��o��I° �s s �_ � ;._, 1 . � ;sa�"�a:e�ae� a °;-�#-@�. --- -— s , Q o.�: • I J� �' 3 { J�� T' i o� '�'�S y i ; f;�(31��'O° �"1��I�f1• ;: � � I ! �� ',�� ; � - 4 , � �f, .; �� :�_. , �� _ � ' F ' p� ' } ��, �i' �illill�� , ■ t a � � � � i. i • � � � 8 3 a f$; I Q t Q �t li�s :� i�� y �� S S i� ��e� �`+ � �l�+ � If� I � ; ¢ l�ti ��I � �� i i'1� � I • e Vl/ � I � iil�i � I � � • I......��,��. � ..i� �': ' i '=--'t—. �—.---.� 1�� . i . , , ��P . . , . . ��`: �� -�-� . . , , _ . . � �� s ��. 3=---= - _ _ --_ �� , .� �, :� t � � �� !� 1�� ii� �E , � �j tia �� J ! i1-� �' . . . ' . ..�� , �. .. _ . '_�7 C1TY OF FRIDLEY 6d31 UNIVERSITY AVENUE �RIDLEY, Mtv 55432 (612) 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FOR: � Plat Lot Split PROPERTY INFORMATION: - site plan required for submittal� see attached . Address: N°rr�c° Dn"e � Prope�ty Identification Number. I1-30-24�42-000� (oortion� Legal Description: Lot 1 Block 1 Tract/Addition Nortt�co &�iness Par�c 5r�► =- Addition, An aonoi ty, Mi.ruyesota :� . Current Zoning: M-2 Square footage/acreage: 60'9,825 (14.o acres) � Reason for Subdivision: de�eto��ent of ,racant �and Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license? �'"�. -� Yes No X If Yes, which city? �� - If Yes, what type of business? — � Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes -� =; No �-� �-�: f- ��: � �V �r1r�I��►�r�r�r�V�r�V�V�r��V^��rYVNM1�Ar�Yr1I�V �V �V�r�V�r^��I1I��V tiAr�b^r�V��M�r�`r�IM�I/�r�V�V�Y�1r�I��/V�V�Ar��/V�� FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the property title) � . (Contract purchasers: Fee owners must sign this form prior to processing) � NAME: C�I Proper�es, Inc �. ADDRESS: ��5 University Avenue West, S�te 150, St. Paul, Md 55114 �� DAYTIME PHONE: 64E�- �» SIGNATURE/D E: �: t2 2 � Contact: Ihve Carland/Maz'k Kiisnierek =- ` - ' Vice-President _ "" �` "- _ n� _ �;�<; .�...�.w.�..�..+r.�r�r.�...r.�r.�..u.�rr.�.^.rr.�rnr.wr^.�r�r.�..�r.o..rw.wr.�r.�...�.w..�rw.rr.�r....�.�rr.�r��r�wr.�r�r..r�r�.1►r�.�ri►r.i..v . . . . ' _ - � . S^. ,� .' . ". J . �,�,a .. . �. � ,w A : PETITIONER INFORMATION � - _ ��; -- - ` � = - ,.i.w -< NAME: � . . �.-�' - : :.. ADDRESS: � ` � DAYTIME PHONE: SIGNATURE/DATE: " -- Ar�V�r�VtiM^/�Y�V�V�VIVVAr�V^r�NV�V�VV�V/V1VAr�VNwr�V�V1/A/M/�r M�V�V�V�VM�N�V�V�VMVA/�VN�V�VN{tirA/�V�V - . . � �.� ' 'i . i,�. �`.. FEES --� �; ' _` � �� 5�:' Plat: . 500.00 for 20 Lots, $15.00 for ea additional lot � f Tot � Lot Split: $250.00 Recei t #: � / � : Received By:� � `� ''� Applicationf Number�— '�� ` - - Scheduled Planning Commission ate: _: . Scheduled City Council Date: 10 Day Applicat on omplete otification Dat 60 Day Date: • � � ,, � �,, ,�� . ._ � . �. �, x ..s. -,r „� �:,,�,,, _ ` Y. .. .. . . � -�� F �� j . s� x . . . . . . _ re z: - 3.10 � .� -::� § -�� ' �� _ � . DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Community Development Department P G DIVISION City of Fridley May 12, 1994 William Burns, City Manager �rQ Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Resolution Approving Plat Request, P.S. #94-02, by Fridley Business Center Partnership, for Northco Business Park 5th Addition The City Council conducted a public hearing regarding the Northco plat request on April 18, 1994. The request is for property generally located at 500 - 73rd Avenue N.E. Located on the property is the Kwik File manufacturing building and the former Carter Day research and development facility. In conjunction with Northco Business Park 5th Addition, Dayton- Hudson Corporation is also platting its property to the east. They are purchasing Outlot A, Northco Business Park 5th Addition and Lot 1, Block 1, Northco 4th Addition. Target has not prepared its final plat due to discovering a mortgage on a portion of its proper�y. The mortgage holder, Equitable Insurance, refused to sign the final plat. Dayton-Hudson is intending to pay the remaining amount on the mortgage; however, the mortgager will not accept payment until May 18, 1994. Northco requests that the City Council approve the plat at its May 16, 1994 meeting so that it may close the sale with Target for Outlot A, Northco Business Park 5th Addition and Lot l, Block 1, Northco 4th Addition on May 18, 1994. Staff is concerned regarding the status of Outlot A should the sale with Target not occur. If the plat is approved and if the sale does not occur, Outlot A would become a landlocked parcel. As a contingency, Northco has agreed to the following additional stipulation: 6. Outlot A, Northco Business Park 5th Addition shall be replatted with Lot 1, Block 1, Northco Business Park 5th Addition or Lot 1, Block l, Northco Business Park 4th Addition if Outlot A is not purchased by Dayton-Hudson Corporation, the adjacent property owner. .1 Northco Business Park 5th Addition May 12, 1994 Page 2 This contingency will insure that Ou�lot A will have street frontage, either from 73rd Avenue or Northco Drive. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached resolution approving the plat for Northco Business Park 5th Addition with the following stipulations; (1. Access from 73rd Avenue shall be limited to one driveway on � Lot 2, Block 1, Northco 4th Addition. �2. A joint driveway easement shall be executed between Fridley Business Center Partnership and Dayton Hudson regarding the easterly driveway located on Lot 2, Block l, Northco 4th Addition. 3. The 100 foot vegetative buffer adjacent to 73rd Avenue shall be maintained. � 4. An open air easement shall be executed and recorded against Lot 1, Block 1, Northco 5th Addition between Fridley Business Center Partnership and Dayton Hudson. This open air easement shall prevent construction of any structures within the 25 foot easement. 5. Park fees shall be paid at time of building permit issuance. 6. Outlot A shall be replatted with either�Lot 1, Block 1, Northco Business Park 5th Addition or Lot 1, Block 1, Northco Business Park 4th Addition if Outlot A is not purchased by Dayton-Hudson Corporation, the adjacent property owner. MM/dn M-94-255 3.12 MEMOR.ANDUM PLANNING DIVISION Date: 1 J15/99 n� I To: William Bums, City Manage�� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Appeals Commission action on Variance #98-40 M-99-12 INTRpDUCTION The City of Fridley has been asked, by Mr. & Mrs. Willard_ Johnson, to grant a variance allowing them to store their travel trailer on their paved driveway. Staff identified site characteristics that do not allow the petitioners to park in the side or rear yard. Therefore, Staff recommended approval of this variance request. APPEALS COMMISSION ACTION At the January 13, 1999 Appeals Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for VAR #98-40. After much discussion, the appeals commission was concemed that action in favor of this variance would set a precedent. The Commission does not believe that campers should be stored on the driveway under any circumstances. The consensus was that the City Council needed to establish the policy on this issue. A motion was made to deny the requested variance, in order for the City Council to take action on this issue. The Appeals Commission denied the request on a 3-1 vote. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends that the City Council approve variance request #98-40 to allow this camper to be stored on the driveway, due to site grades which do not allow storage in the side or rear yard. As long as camper storage is regulated by the zoning code, the citizens of Fridley will continue to have the option to request a variance based on unique circumstances. Staff recommends that the City examine each request on its own merits. In this particular case, the same site grades that prevented side yard storage provided screening of the travel trailer. 4.01 City of Fridley Land Use Application VAR-98-40 January 13, 1999 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Willard & Donna Johnson 560 Fairmont NE Fridley, MN 55432 Requested Action: Variance Purpose: To park a travel trailer on blacktop driveway rather than the side or rear yard. Existing Zoning: Residential - 1 Location: 560 Fairmont.NE Size: 11,000 square feet .25 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family Home Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family & R-1 E: Single Fainily & R-1 S: Single Family & R-1 W: Single Family & R-1 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Section 205.07.06.B.(2), requires travel trailers to be stored in the side or rear yard. Zoning History: Zoned R-1, home built 1960, Legal Description of Property: Lots 33, 34, 35, 36 Block J, Riverview Heights Addition SPECIAL INFORMATION Council Action: 1 /25/99 Public Utilities: Home is connected. Transportation: Home is accessed by Fairmont, there is no alley. Physical Characteristics: Lot has steep grade from the house down to the street. Lot is well landscaped and contains the home, tuck-under garage, and many large trees. SUMMARY OF PROJECT The Johnsons are seeking to store their travel trailer in their paved driveway. The slopes in their yard do not allow the trailer to be pulled into the side or rear yard. SUMMARY OF HARDSHIP "We have no access for a vehicle to our back yard because our lot rises steeply on either side of our driveway ". (Full letter attached) SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this variance due to the unique hardship presented by the slopes in the yard. No similar variances have been granted. Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin 4.02 VAR-98-40 HARDSHIP STATEMENT "We request a variance allowing us to keep our 25' travel trailer on our blacktop - surface driveway directly in front of our tuck under garage. We have no access for a vehicle to our back yard because our lot rises steeply on either side of our driveway, which was the reason for under house garages when the house was built in 1960." -Mr. & Mrs. Willard J. Johnson ANALYSIS Section 205.07.06.B.(2) requires that all materials shall be kept in a building or shall be fully screened, so as not to be visible from any public right of way except for stacked firewood, boats and trailers place in the side yard. Due to steep slopes and large oak trees there is no possible way to put the travel trailer in the side yard. There is no alley behind the home to access the rear yard. Due to the steep slopes and nature of the lot, the travel trailer is fairly well screened from all neighbors but those directly across the street. These neighbors have submitted a letter �+�+�,,.. +h�t +hA�� n�t minci thP I�cation of the travel trailer. The above pictures demonstrate the limitations placed on side yard storage, due to tne 4.03 physical characteristics of the Johnson's yard. The pictures also illustrate how the travel trailer is partialiy screened due to the slopes and trees found at the site. RECOMMENDATIONS City Staff recommends approval of this variance due to the unique hardship presented by the slopes in the yard. The slopes found at the site are clearly a hardship preventing the Johnson's from accessing their sid� yards for storag�. Ttiou�h staff prefers the code required, side or rear yard storage, in this casa the slopes that prevent the side yard storage also provide screening �f the travel trailer. STIPULATIONS If appreved by the appeals commission, staff recommends the following stipulat�on be attached: 1. Petitio�er shall continue parking travel trailer as close to garage as possible. 2. Petitioner shall continue parking towing vehicle in garage when not in u�e. 4.04 crnr oF Fwo��r 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE �R10LEY, MN 55432 (612) 571-3450 � COMMUNiTY D�1/ELOPMENT DEPARTME�T VARIANCE APPLICATION FOR: Residential Com�nerciaUlndustrial Signs PROPERTY Address: .! �AT10N: - site plan required for submittal, see attached %'r? �•✓! /% .�i --- - -- ---_ Property identificatio� Number. Legal Description: Lot333Y Block � Tract/Addition ��,-e�� w e� q hfis 3� ¢3� - C��rrent Zoning: � Reason for Variance: 0 .� , ��'f''G K 7�O p _ Square foota�e/acreage: /� a� � ��us 5 -�- -tfl k � �-� -�,e�.�e � F�✓�' W•:L c � ; i��- Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license? Yes No tf Yes, which city? if Yes, what type of business? Was that license ever denied or revoked? Yes No _____�___�_�____......_ _......__�_____�_��__�_�. �____.,._.�� FEE OWNER 1NFORMATION (as it appears on the prope�ty title) (Contract purchasers: Fee owners must sign this rm prior to p�ocessing) NAM E: Lvi 1. � a 4 J �.�o,�,�; "�- k, � sE-,�/s ,� .ti� ADORESS: S � -��v'- /�'�" . DAYTIME PHONE: 7�'�-7y��" SIGNATURE/DATE PETITIONER 1NFORMATION - ' NAME: �� e- � - ADDRESS: DAYTIME PHONE: SIGNATURE/DATE: � ��..��......_..�......��......��....,. � �......�....,.��_�...�..�.�...��.,....��_ �.�....� Section of City Code: FEES - _ Fee: $100.00 for commercial�� industrial� or signs: �� Fee: $60.00 for residential prope�ties: ,�_ Receipt #: -,�'..��- Received By: . Application Number. �'�-�0 Scheduled Appeals Commission Date: � � Scheduled City Council Date: __ / �,� , 10 Day Application Complete Notification Date: 60 Day Date: _ - �.�. ��:-_ 4.06 � , - �. o��c��1 acicC �s�oc��tes, ��. � � �� . � � . LAND SURYc�YORS Anoko, hl�nnesota CERTIF!CA7E � OF SURVcY: °aLPH t��. LU��D ( ` ^,�"1 ; A,R�o�1 � � � / 5�• �� `.�E�! A Te(=phone 421•6340 o��_� =.p_�o --� D��oTEs IROtJS �J 1 �2 � �24 � � r _!- __ y l.oTS ?", �a �►Na ?G, �3�oc:c "J P I`!;_�'V 1�'+�: H� I GHTS ANOKA COUtvTY� i%INNES07A I H'cQE3Y GERi��Y iH�i T`ii5 IS A Tf�l:= ANa CORREGT R:P3�SE`7TATiO�J Cf A SURVEY OP THE BOUNDAi:�ES OP THE ASOYE DES;R!3_D ltNO, aN� T:tc lOC4TtJrJ OF Al? S:1:lDiNrS, iHc:�cON, A::O Atl �IStSt°_ ENCROACNtecNTS, 7F ANY, FROM OR ON �Sa�7 LA?:7. AS SU2YEY:� CY M"e iH�s c:.1TFi DAY OF .............'',.AY.......,................................._.A.D. 19,. �.'.. I h. C. HOIUM_AND ASSOCIATF", INC._,� LAND_SURYEY0,2 -•• .. ' -------- - ... ';'�rl.''i;'�,�c�.-a:s• - .. . �'� ' . � 4.07 dY(2�. ��V�Lfazd a. �o��z --, , � 60 �laizinonE c'� . . �'zi.c��y, a�(ir_neaoEa ��4�2 � . � �� .� �� - � � �� _ � �� ./ � . � .�.� � : �� - _� � �� "u , ��a/ � �-��'-� � �� ` � � D � �� C� •��¢��" - ` " �� . , � �� "f� Gt�-�.�� .: 4.i�- . � ' ' ��,` �f�L � �� ✓ ',�G�-� L� .�� i�G /�`�� x%� ' `i�s/�G�"� /�'- - sQ�C� % ../�%'� t-�✓ � �-� � � � y � �. .��--¢-� �� /� � /� .o. ��l`�; ��' , ' r?/�� .��-� �; �;L. c-� ti��''- � � �F■�8 .�: CAMPUSFAX ID�612-626-8180 JAN 06'99 7�15 No.001 P.O� 1/5/99 Dell Freitag 537 Fainnont St N E Fridley, MN 55432 Re: case # VAR #98-40 To Whom It May Concern: � I am not in favor of allowing a travel trailer to be parked on a blacktop driveway ii� the front yard near mc or anywl�ere in Fridley for that matter. 1 feel that a person should be ablc to pay to have it stored if they can not fit it on the side or in back, lt'they can afford the tra.vel trailer they need to realize that there might be extra cost involved. Many people have extra cazs, boats, ieehouses, and numerous othcr things stored. � If we allow one person to do tliis, we are opening the door for many others to do the same. It sets a. bad standard tliat can backfire. I was listening to news not long a�o to an report about thc city of St. Louis Park. They cl�ariged their standard for things stored in the yard by limitittg where and how much can be in or around cach house. The reporter asks this wo»lan what she was going to do. She said, "Oh, that's all right, I'll store mine in my folk's yard in Maple Plain". Haw sad if that were to happcn to Fridley. We do not want to allow this to become "Oh tliat's all ri�ht, I'll store mine in my folk's yard in Fridley". If we do not let it be�in, we will not have to work to stop it latter. Thank you, ` ��_ Dell Freitag . � •, JAN-05-1999 15�45 Janua.y 5, 1999 Mr. Scott Hickok Planning Coordinator City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Re: Dear Mr. Hickok: HENNEPIN COUNTY VAR #98-40, Wiilard & Donna Johnson 560 Fairmont Street 612 3488532 t P.01i@1 We live across the street from the Johnsons at 593 Fairmont Street. We feel they are very responsible people and conscious homeowners who take great care of their property. We see no reasons to object to them keeping their travel trailer pazked in their driveway. Sincerely, ' ! � �/ � ,. . � , , Robert & Mardell Hadley � 4.10 TOTAL P.01 i/� �� / . � - c �� / t ; . . . � �� V� � � ��`� ��- �� , � � . ; � �� ,U� .�� , �� .-�� - �.�� . �Lq �% �� % �/ � ` � �`� � 4.11 Cor��e.�n.'�5 D 1'hoitt„ : Y �� 1(0 l!! `^ Lvv i t C'�a �"'� c773_,__ra,i�mo�. f' � � �� .,+^ �`..� w� t�. Gu- �t0 c r �G.�, rc r��r`- t 5. !� l�o t c� �01� le w. a.� Q j( �� 4.12 Mr. Jones stated he did not see it as a big deal. It appears be consistent with other designs. He was not sure about the hardship, but he w d vote in favor of the request. Dr. Vos stated he would vote in favor. The site is a cul-de-sac. When they do that; most houses are set back a ways and you lose stance in the back and the boulevard in the front. If this was on a regular street, they ould be a long way away from the back lot line. Secondly, he was impressed by the ' tance from the neighbor to the west. Going out four feet wilf not affect the neighbor the west. M T N by Dr. Vos, seconded b r. Jones, to approve Variance Request, VAR #98-39, by John Harwood, to increase t allowable encroachment into the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 13 feet to allo the replacement of an existing deck on Lot 4, Block 1, Blomberg's Estates, gener y located at 7661 Brigadoon Place. UPON A VOICE VOT , ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CA IED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. PUBLIC HEARING� CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #98�0. BY WILLARD & DONNA JOHNSON: Per Section 205.07.06.B.(2) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to allow the storage of a travel trailer on a blacktop driveway in the front yard rather than in the side or rear yard on Lots 33, 34, 35, 36, Block J, Riverview Heights, generally located at 560 Fairmont Street. M TI N by Mr. Jones, seconded by Dr. Vos, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:40 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioners are requesting a variance to park a travel trailer on a driveway rather than in the side or rear yard at 560 Fairmont Street. The property is located west of East River Road on Fairmont Street. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family, as are the surrounding properties. The code requires that travel trailers be stored in the side or year yard. There is no land use history for the site. The home was constructed in 1960. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioners hardship statement states: We have no access for a vehicle to our back yard because our lot rises steeply on either side of our driveway." Mr. Bolin stated staff visited the site. Due to the steep slopes on either side of the driveway, large trees and lack of an alleyway, there is no access to the side or rear yard. No similar requests have been granted in the past. No similar requests have been made. Due to the hardships presented by the slopes and the yard, there is no way to get this travel trailer into the side or rear yard. These same slopes help to provide good screening for the trailer. Staff recommends approval of the request with the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall continue travel trailer as close to garage as possible. 2. Petitioner shall continue parking towing vehicle in garage when not in use. 4.13 Mr. Jones asked what brought up the variance in the first place. Mr. Botin stated this came up as part of the systematic code enforcement efforts. Mr. Kuechle asked how many more of these does staff expect to see. Ms. Daniels stated this is becoming a big code issue. Staff has two more requests right now. Dr. Vos stated residents can temporarily park a trailer, boat, etc., in the driveway. Ms. Daniels stated the code says they should be in the side or rear yard. In the summer when in use constantly, they have allowed them to stay in the driveway. Mr. Bolin stated it is generally boats, personal water craft, snowmobiles, etc. This is the first time campers have been brought into the spotlight. Mr. Kuechle asked if this is going to become a big problem. If so, do they need to take a careful look at this point? Mr. Bolin stated right now it may be best to deal with the requests on a case-by-case basis. If someone does have access to their side or rear yard, staff would rather see the trailers, etc., stored where the code requires. If there is a true case of hardship o� other factors such as in this case where hills prevent the side yard storage, that also screens as well. Sometime down the road as systematic code enforcement continues, it is something the City Council may have to deal with. Right now, staff does not have a problem with the Appeals Commission dealing with these on an individual basis. Mr. Johnson stated he had no comments to add to the staff report. Dr. Vos stated one of the neighbors wrote a note saying that other people have boats, campers, etc., but would put them in paid storage. Mr. Johnson stated they looked at that but there were no places available in Fridley. One place was full, and another had only one opening. Dr. Vos stated there is one place on East River Road behind Wicks. He pays $112 per month for two things. There are finro businesses in Fridley that have storage--one on Highway 65 and one off East River Road. You can get inside storage but you pay more. Ms. Johnson stated the real problem is having the trailer handy. They did not think it was illegaL M�. Johnson stated they have had a truck with a camper parked in the driveway since 1984. There were no complaints. Dr. Vos stated that can be parked outside because of the truck. That was in compliance. Mr. Johnson stated they see a lot of motor homes on the driveways in Fridley. Ms. Daniels stated motor homes are considered a motorized vehicle and are allowed in the driveway. 4.14 Mr. Swanson stated he lived adjacent to the Johnsons since 1960. They keep their property very neat. They are super neighbors. The trailer and parking is not an eyesore at all. MOTION by Mr. Jones, seconded by Ms. Mau, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:55 P.M. Mr. Kuechle stated he has a problem with this issue because he can see where it would open the doors in the future. He would have to concede that staff has probably given this a lot of thought as well. He did not see a particular problem with it. He believed this is an issue the City Council should face. It does not make sense that someone could park a motor home in the driveway and not this trailer. He would recommend approval. Dr. Vos state he did notice that one neighbor was not in favor of the variance which means it automatically goes to the City Council. In his neighborhood, they are trying to get things out of the front yard. He is against the request on principle. He can sympathize with the petitioner. You cannot see the trailer from the east or west. They are the first to come in on this issue. He, too, believed it should be dealt with on a bigger scale. He would vote against the request because it sets a precedent. If they get more, he will vote against them because you can find a place to store these trailers. Ms. Mau agreed. She thought that they pass ordinances because it is in the best interests of the City as a whole. She does realize it is a hardship, and the petitioners are the first to request such a variance. She also agrees that motor homes are probably larger than this travel trailer, but she would have to vote to deny the request on the grounds that it will open the flood gates. They will end up with everyone having a trailer wanting a variance, and she did not see how they could judge everyone individually. She thought they had an ordinance for a reason. Mr. Jones agreed. On one hand, he can appreciate the favorable comments from the neighbors. However, he is not going to vote in favor of the request because it opens a larger issue about trailers and other things that people will want to park in the driveway. He realizes the issue and sees the hardship in not being able to park the trailer in the side or rear yard; however, being an owner of these things himself, he has had to get storage off his property as well. He would vote to deny the variance and let the City Council make the determination. TI N by Mr. Jones, seconded by Dr. Vos, to recommend denial of Variance Reques4, VAR #98-40, by Willard & Donna Johnson. UPON A VOICE VOTE, WITH MS. MAU, DR. VOS AND MR. JONES VOTING AYE, AND MR. KUECHLE VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. Mr. Bolin stated the City Council would consider this request on January 25. 4. PD TE N PLANNIN MMI S N AND ITY A TI N: Mr. Hickok stated he did not have an date at this time. 4.15 MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Date: January 21, 1999 �� To: William Burns, City Manager ,,� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Julie Jones, .Planning Assistant/Recycling Coordinator Subject: Curbside Recycling Proposals Background: The City of Fridley's two-year curbside recycling contract with Waste Management expires March 30, 1999. Due to dissatisfaction with service, the City decided last month not to extend the existing contract with Waste Management and to instead, seek proposals. On January 15, ihe City received two proposals for this service. Proposals were given for both a two-year and a three-year contract. The City is currently paying Waste Management $2.15/household/month for weekly recycling collection to single family through 12-unit apartment buildings. Proposal Details: Waste Management, the existing contractor, submitted a proposal of $1.96/household/ month for both single family and multi-unit buildings. The total annual cost of their proposal would be $202,037. Waste Management is proposing a two-sort system where containers would continue to be accepted commingled, as now, and all paper grades would be mixed.together (currently newspaper must be set out separate from mixed mail). Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI) submitted a proposal of $2.12/household/month for single family units and $1.40/unit for multi-unit buildings. The total annual cost of their proposal would be $210,667. BFI's proposal is to continue the three-sort system that Waste Management currently provides and also to continue collecting according to the existing routes. BFI is in the process of converting their current sorting facility in north Minneapolis to sort commingled material. It is currently being tested, and is expected to be fully operational in February. BFI has already been collecting recyclables commingled in the City of Columbia Heights for some time. 5.01 Similarities in Proposals: Replacement of existing multi-unit carts is included in both company's proposals. Both companies also agreed to conduct one food shelf donation drive per year at no additional cost. Both companies have the manpower and equipment capacity to sufficiently service the City of Fridley. Both companies have the ability to market recyclables nationally and internationally. Only BFI has done the food shelf donation service previously. Differences in Proposals: The difference between the finro companies is in their current reputation for quality of service. BFI received glowing service reports from the city accounts we surveyed. However, Waste Management was reported to providing poor service to the four cities we contacted. Staff's own personal experience with Waste Management since April, 1997, has been troublesome. On two occasions over the term of the contract, we have implemented financial penalties on Waste Management for missed collections. We have experience a lot of driver turnover and lack of support from management, which is why we have placed stricter language in many parts of the proposed contract. Staff is concerned, however, that the new supervisory requirements will be impossible to enforce. In addition to their better service record, BFI is also proposing some extra services that Waste Management has not offered. Their proposal states that they will have an Education Coordinator assigned to work with the City of Fridley. They also propose a public awareness campaign to rejuvenate excitement about recycling in Fridley, including special events along with traditional media coverage. BFI also plans to incorporate their True Blue Looking Out for You crime watch program, where they would train with our crime prevention officers and serve as an extra set of eyes and ears for neighborhood crime prevention. Since these drivers have two-way radios in their trucks, they can report a potential crime almost immediately. The most critical factor in considering these two proposals, is also considering the impact of the annual cost of curbside recycling collection on SCORE funds the City receives from Anoka County. Unlike you'd assume, accepting the lower cost curbside collection proposal would cause the City to loose more SCORE funding under our current 1999 budget. Due to the Recycling Center closing and the 1997 increase in SWAP fees, the City of Fridley will be taking in more revenue than our expenses in 1999. It appears that the City witl need to reduce SWAP fees to taxpayers in 1999 to avoid losing $25,000-$40,000 in SCORE funds. The exact amount that we should reduce SWAP fees to will depend on which curbside proposal is accepted by the City. EQEC Recommendation: The Environmental Quality and Energy Commission received a staff report on the proposal at their January 19 meeting. After discussing the options, they unanimously passed a motion recommending that the City accept BFI's proposal for a three-year contract. . 5.02 Staff Recommendation: Due to the persistent service problems our residents have suffered through with Waste Management, staff also recommends that we accept BFI's proposal. Staff further recommends negotiating a three-year term with BFI. Because of the cost difference befinreen the two proposals, BFI has indicated that they would be willing to negotiate a lower price under a three year term. Upon completion of contract negotiations, staff recommends that the City Council amend Ordinance 113 to lower the SWAP fee rate to minimize the loss in SCORE funding in 1999. M-99-15 5.03 . Recreation and Natural Resource Department To: From: Date: Re: emo � William W. Burns, City Manager �� Jack Kirk, Director of Recreation and Natural Resources •�i January 14, 1999 Change Order No. 3- Fridley Community Center Project Attached is Change Order No. 3 for the Fridley Community Center Project in the amount of $1,113.00. This change order is for providing a wall-mounted ballet rail in the lower level dance / exercise room in lieu of a floor mounted rail. Costs associated with this change order include removal of the floor mounted steel rail, materials, construction and mounting of the wood, wall-mounted rail on the east wall of the dance / exercise room. I recommend the City Council approve Change Order No. 3 for the Fridley Community Center Lower Level project #319 in the amount of $1,113.00, bringing the total for this project to $246,781.00. 6.01 City of Fridley Recreation & Natural Resource Department 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 January 20, 1999 TO: Crawford-Merz Construction Company 2316 Fourth Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55404 RE: CHANGE ORDER NO. 3, FRIDLEY COMMUNITY CENTER LOWER LEVEL, PROJECT NO. 319 You are hereby ordered, authorized, and instructed to modify your contract for the Fridley Community Center Lower Level, Project No. 319 by adding the following work: APPROX ITEM QTY PRICE AMOUNT Ballet Rail TOTAL ADDITIONS -- CHANGE ORDER N0. 3 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS: Lump Sum $1,113.00 $1,113.00 Original Contract Amount ........................................................................................:.... $233,067.00 Contract Additions -- Change Order No. 1 ........................................................................ 8,154.00 Contract Additions -- Change Order No. 2 ........................................................................ 4,447.00 Contract Additions -- Change Order No. 3 ........................................................................1,113.00 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT ................................................................................ $246,781.00 6.�2 Crawford-Merz Construction Co. Change Order No. 2 Fridley Community Center Lower Level Page 2 Prepared, submitted and approved by Jack Kirk, Director of Recreation and Natural Resources, on the 14th day of January, 1999. .�� ./`S .,.. L Jack Kirk Director of Recreation and Natural Resources Approved and accepted this Approved and accepted this JAC WFCC/CONSTRUCTIO WCHANGEORDERM3 day of day of 6.03 , 1999 by: CRAWFORD-MERZ CONSTRUCTION CO. Wayne D. Anderson Vice President of Operations 1999 by: CITY OF FRIDLEY Robert Barnette Acting Mayor Wiiliam W. Burns City Manager �oF F,� U =-G PuBUC�vo�cs MEMORANDUM To: William W. Burns, City Manager �'� � �'� � From: John. Flora, �irector of Public Works Paul Lawrence, Superintendent of Public Works Date: January 14, 1999 Subject: Water SCADA System Upgrade The City of Fridley advertised for and received sealed bids for upgrading the SCADA system for the City's water system and sewer lift stations. The SCADA system upgrade is year 2000 compliant. The City received one proposal from Automatic Systems Company, Roseville MN, in the amount of $184,375 including sales tax. Automatic Systems installed the existing SCADA system and has been very responsive to the City's service needs. Staff recommends the City Council receive the bid and award the contract to Automatic Systems in the amount of $184,375. The City has allocated $204,000 in the 1999 budget for this work. 7.01 ^ - - WATER AND SEWER SCADA SYSTEM BID TABULATION SHEET JANUARY 13,1999 Lump sum bid for Items A through E, FOB factory with &eight allowed to Fridley, MN, including one (1) year warranty from date of startup: $184 375. 00 Tax Included CompanyName Automatic Svstems Company Address of Company 2400 west co. 1td. D Roseville, MN. 55113 Telephone Number 651-631-9Q05 Printed Name Bruce A. Wirth Signature Estimated Delivery and Installation Date Julv 1 1999 7.0� � NOTICE TO BIDDERS UPGRADE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY WATER AND SEWER SCADA SYSTEM Sealed bid proposals will be received and publicly opened by the City of Fridley, Anoka County, MN 55432, at the office of the Public Works Director, 6431 University Avenue NE, Fridley, MN 55432 (Tel. #612-572-3550) on Wednesday, January 13, 1999, at 11:00 a.m. for furnishing hardware, software, labor, transportation, installation, training and start-up for the upgade of the City of Fridley Water and Sewer SCADA system. All bidders must be an Allen Bradley authorized systems integrator. All in accordance with the general specifications approved by John G. Flora PE, Public Works Director, Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue NE, Fridley; MN 55432. Vendors shall visit the site served by the existing SCADA system to determine the existing configuration to assure that the upgraded system will continue to function as the existing configuration. Copies of the general specifications can be obtained by calling 612-572- 3566, Monday through Friday, from 7:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. All equipment, hardware and software must be the equipment, hardware and software specified in the general specifications. The City Council reserves the right to reject any and all proposals and to waive any informalities in any proposal received without explanation. No proposal may be withdrawn for a period of thirty (30) days. By order of the City Council of the City of Fridley, MN. Dated this 15 Day of December 1998. Published: Fridley Focus December 24, 1998 December 31, 1998 January 7, 1999 7.03 .' CITY OF FRIDLEY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS Upgrade of the City of Fridley Water and Sewer SCADA System The City of Fridley is requesting bid proposals for the upgrade of the City's Water and Sewer SCADA System. Vendors shall be responsible for assessing the current SCADA configuration to determine all changes necessary (hardware, soflware) to have the upgaded system function as the e�risting configuration currently operates (3 water treatment plants, 2 water booster pumps, 13 wells, 13 sewer lift stations). The vendors' bid proposal shall include all costs associated with the upgrade, including but not limited to investigating and assessing the current configuration, design cost, hardware/equipment, software, licenses, labor, transportation, start-up and training. All bidders must show proof of being an Allen Bradley authorized systems integrator. The work shall be completed in a manner that will allow the Water and Sewer System to continue to function without interruption of service during installation of the upgrade. Vendors shall furnish the following equipment, hardware and software when bidding on this proposal (all equipment, software and configuration furnished must be year 2000 Y2K compliant): I. Personal Computer & Operator Interface Modules Hardware and Software Upgrade A. One (1) Lot labor and materials to replace the existing SCADA computer located in the Commons Park Water Treatment Plant with a new personal computer & 1��NII software completely configured as follows: Proposed computer shall be manufactured by Dell Computer, provided with 400 MHz Intel processor, 64MB RAM, lO.OGB HD, 3.5" floppy, 24X CD-Rom, 1 G ZIP Drive with two (2) 1G cartridges, 3Com 56K phone Modem, sound card with speakers, 2 seriaUprinter ports, natural keyboard, Microsoft mouse, SVGA 8MB V�ideo card & 17" Trinitron SVGA monitor and software consisting of one Wonderware Intouch 60K tag Development license one (1) Microsoft Excel license (for reports) & one (1) Alas Maintenance license (for maintenance reports) fully configured with the same cunent functions; including one (1) dot-matrix printer for status/alarm events and one (1) Laser Printer for reports. B. Three (3) Lot labor and materials to replace the existing Panelview Operator Interface Modules located in each control panel at Commons Park Water Treatment Plant, Locke Park Water Treatment Plant and 63rd Avenue Booster Station with 200 MHz Pentium Power Stations and PLC interface modules installed in place of each Operator Interface Module including 7.0� Wonderwaze Intouch 60K tag Runtime Software Package fully configured with the same current functions. .- C. �� 3� Days of 8-hour sessions of Operator Training. D. Three (3) Sets of Approval Drawings/Data including updated drawings of the existing control system. E• Three (3) Copies of Complete Installatioq Operation & Maintenance Manuals include a complete redrawn set of drawings, including the complete SCADA system including all remote sites. II. Systems Integrator Requirements t1• Contractor shall provide the specified integrated control system modification and assume overall responsibility for coordination, engineering, progarnming, preparation of shop drawings showing detailed wiring diagrams (including point-to-point connections between all components of control equipment and other equipment) and for performance of all equipment specified/required for this project. B• Contractor qualifications/requirements: 1• Contractor must be an Allen-Bradley authorized systems integrator to submit a bid on this project and must provide written proof from Allen- Bradley. 2• Provide 100% supply/performance/payment bond. 3• Provide certificate showing evidence of $1,000,000 insurance coverage for professional liability/errors and omissions. 4• Provide certificate showing evidence of $1,500,000 insurance coverage for comprehensive general liability (all risk insurance). 5• Purchase owner's protective liability insurance policy with same limits as comprehensive general liability policy to protect owner and engineer � against any and al1 claims in liabilities for injury to or death of persons or damage to property caused whole or in part by any negligent acts or omissions of integrator arising from work on this project; name owner and engineer again as additional insured and maintain this policy in full force and effect for entire duration of this project. 6• Provide UL-508 & UL913 serialized labels on all completed assemblies. Systems integrator must have written proof from Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. to label complete assemblies under IJL-508 & UL-913. 7. Have similar types/quantities of control systems in municipal water treatment industry for a minimum of 15 years; submit list of minimum 35 installations for which integrator has provided similar type/quantity of equipment, including name and telephone number of person responsible 7.(1�'J 8. 9. 10. 11 for operation and maintenance of each installation. '' Stock pazts for equipment suPPlied; submit current inventory list. Systems integrator office must be located within ZS m�les of Fridley, MN• Owner/engineer may conduct investigatioa as they deem necessary to determine technical quali5cations and financial ability of contractor to perform work on this project; submit required/re9uested informarion ability of contractor to perform v�+ork on this project� s�b�t required/ requested information to facilitatelexpedite such investigations: a. Owner/engineer may request contractor to appear before and make presentation of qualifications. �te ator if b. Owner/engineer reserves the right to reject any 8r evidence submitted by, or investigated o� integrator fails to satisfy owner/engineec that proposed integrator is adequately � qualified/equipped to carry out obligations under this contract and complete work in a timely manner. A mandatory site visit to each location, including a11 remote telemetry sites within the SCADA system is required prior to submitting a bid to verify existing conditions and programmin$ logic. • Payment for the upgrade s6a11 be one lump sum payment within 30 days of the date of invoice following delivery of equipment (hardware and software), installation of equipment and startup. 7.�5 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT AREA � C�: <�::;::: ';:>:�� `>:::.:..:>::>:: �>�:>::�`: �� .:. C�t :,� : :�::: C.:: :.:,: WATER �:�;�:�: " . 1998 ELIMINATE DEAD END LINE AT HEATHER PL TO BEN MORE WELL REPAIIt NO'S 2, 6& 7 HACKMAN AVE WATERMAIN REPLACE (CENTRAL/TENTIISOI� INSPECT & REPAIR 1'h M STANDPIPE (53RD JOHNSOI� �<��:;; 1999 *SCADA SYSTEM ENHANCEMENT **RNERVIEW TERRACE WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT WELL REPAIR- 8 & 11 YEptR.,;' 2000 ELIMINATE DEAD END LINES HILLCREST DR TO F$RNDALE * 69T`�` AND RICE CREEK BLVD WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT (400 F1� WELL REPAIlt - WELLS NO. 3 AND 5 *REPLACE ALLEYWAY TO PUMP HOUSE ON NO. SIDE OF COMMONS PARK WATER UTII�ITY WATER UTII,ITY WATER UTII.,ITY WATER UTILITY (COMPLETED `97) TOTAL ; � : yr� Mr WATER UTILITY WATER UTILITY TOTAL WATER UTII.ITY WATER UTILITY WATER UT'ILITY WATER UTII.,ITY TOTAL 7■�7 June 9, 1998 8,000.00 75,000.00 120,000.00 0.00 $203.000.00 204,000.00 , 100,000.00 60,000.00 $ 364.000.00 10,000.00 100,000.00 60,000.00 50,000.00 $220.000.00 City of Fridley TO: William W. Burns, City Manager � �'i � FROM: John G. F1ora,�Public Works Director DATE: January 25, 1999 SUBJECT: Memorandum Agreement PW99-009 Again this year, we received a Memorandum of Understanding from the Anoka County Conservation District for reimbursement of City expenses associated with administering the Wetland Conservation Act. This agreement enables the City to receive portions of the Anoka County's block grant for administering the Wetland Conservation Act. It is anticipated that the 1999 funds available to the City will be $197. Recommend the City Council authorize the Mayor to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the Anoka County Conservation District for Wetland Conservation Act reimbursement. JGF:cz Attachment 8.01 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING between the ANOKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT and the CITY OF FRIDLEY This memorandum of understanding is between the Anoka Conservation District, hereinafter called ACD, and the City of Fridley, hereinafter called the LGU (Local Governmental Unit). STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The ACD and the LGU have the common objective of properly and e�ciently implementing the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) of 1991. The Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) has made block grants available to counties to help offset a portion of the costs associated with implementing this Act. The ACD, on behalf of the County Board, will apply for funds in the amount of $197.00 for the City of Fridley. As part of the block grant agreement, your agency will match this amount with cash and/or in-kind services for activities related to the WCA. A. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ACD: 1. Act as the fiscal agent between the State and the LGU. 2. Reimburse the LGU on an annual basis for expenses incuned as a result of implementation of the WCA. 3. Verify, review and compile all documentation and receipts from the LGU at year end. Submit this information as an annual report to the BWSR. B. RESPONSIBILITIES OF LGU: 1. Abide by the permanent rules of the WCA. 2. Maintain accurate and complete records documenting the expenses and in-kind services that are incurred because of the WCA. (Labor, mileage, supplies, field equipment, consultants...). 3. Submit an itemized annual report of expenditures, with any receipts, to the ACD by mid December. A form will be sent to you for reporting purposes. 4. Maintain and report WCA activities including but not limited to wetland avoidance, wetland minimization, exempted impacts, landowner contacts and site inspections. : 1 i� / C. IT IS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD: l. Only those LGUs who formally adopted the WCA in resolution form by January 1, 1999 are eligible to participate in the grant program. 2. Incomplete or missing documentation (and receipts if appropriate), could result in the delay and/or denial of reimbursement for those expenses incurred. 3. If an LGU, at year-end has eapended more than originally requested in the grant program, the LGU will be responsible for the shortage. 4. If an LGU, at year end has expended less than originally requested in the grant program, the LGU will be reimbursed only for those WCA expenses incurred and that grant overages may be re-allocated at the ACD's discretion to LGU's who report excess expenditures. 5. This memorandum of understanding shall commence when executed by both parties and shall continue until year end unless; l) BWSR will not or ceases to authorize funding for WCA activities or; 2) negligence is evident by activities of either party. 6. The Program conducted will be in compliance with all requirements respecting non- discrimination as contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which provides that no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, sex, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any activity receiving federal and/or state assistance from the Anoka Conservation District or any agency thereof. ANOKA CONSE VATION DISTRICT BY: ��. iCA7� � Kim Kovic , Chairman BY: ` Chris A. Lord, District Manager CITY OF FRIDLEY : Nancy Jorgenson, Mayor DATE: //� /!'%� DATE: I � DATE: '8.03 TO: FROM: City of Fridley William W. Burns, City Manager �t� � PW99-006 John G: F1ora,�Public Works Director Jon H.;I�aukaas, Assistant Public Works Director ,.:'� DATE: January 25, 1999 SUBJECT: Street Improvement Project No. ST.� 1999 - 10 (Sealcoat) The attached resolution authorizes the advertisement for bids for the 1999 - 10 sealcoat project. This year we propose to do sealcoating program area 2 and the remainder of area 1 outside of the Riverview Heights Improvement project. In the 1999 budget $160,000 funds are available. Recommend the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the advertisement for bids for the 1999 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1999 - 10 (Sealcoat). JHI-i/JGF: cz Attachment 9.01 RESOLIJTION NO. _ -1999 A RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT, APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1999 -10 (SEALCOAI� WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fridley has established a policy of Sealcoating the City streets on a regular basis, WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has submitted a plan showing the streets in need of sealcoating, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, as follows: l. That the streets recommended for sealcoating by the Public Works Department be sealcoated, and the work involved in said improvement shall hereafter be designated as: STREET Il�IPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.1999 -10 2. The plans and specifcations prepared by the Public Works Department for such improvement and each of them, pursuant to the Council action heretofore, are hereby approved and shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. The work to be performed under STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.1999 -10 be performed under one contract. The Public Works Director shall accordingly prepare and cause to be inserted in the official newspaper advertisement � for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for two (2) weeks (at least 10 days), and shall specify the work to be done and will state that bids will be opened at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, February 24,1999, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Public Works Director and accompanied by a cash deposit, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City of Fridley for five percent (5%) of the amount of such bid. That the advertisement for bids for STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0.1999 -10 shall be substantially standard in form. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCII. OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY TffiS 25TH DAY OF JANUARY,1999. ATTEST: WII,LIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 9.02 "s Jl A � ` _1 � ` . �' � I J � � `\�. e �� ..:�`��-.;: =.':.:•, • �'',� ,\ :: ��.,,.:.; .:, �� , �., . . ` � V � • � 'v,`,•,wrri:'� ; J ' ^ s _ �� . � wi ^, ,�� ` �o N �� '^ �''� � "�,�• � . ; . •,�,,` �. yJ� • ..�.1•�:��1)' .1� ; yy'��,��• . � , ,•.. o - `11� � � I'•w ,`'�` ' '� �,1` ( '� 1� � ' ' ' ,r.`�� { � ' ';�a_ - _. � ; - — 1999-10 SEAL-COAT \ .: e \ ,� I , � �' .G��' � � i o _.r - �...._ �� ;=::�\:, _.� : :� � � � .. � �...�,,,. � �. y - �� .._ _ �;; -� I . � �d,� ,'—_ ;,, — ,` — i . _ +.' _, _-- .-+� — .., 7�d�\ , ;� " ✓� — � _ � — � « \ _ \ :;`/�- — _ " � � -,.:�_'' �� — -- ✓�� —_ � isE — � ' �: � r �� rss ' I �Mw = � _ I,/ ': i• � I � '� � � �• I� t' y. .'• / r e , �� I �1 �' � /�. �� w �� , � � _ � ;,i � , _. ; , f � i _ � / �� ., . 'i� 1 �I I - _ _ �- - J; _ Ip / 1;-i..`"�� '� - } � - -- � �' � ; �.-�----_// ��'�''� i�;�.. _ . /�_ - - - - - - - - _ _ __ � y/ ,� �i�i .r _7" `� � ) J � � .. � �p+M„• �' Y wu� .u. � 1 • • ��: I / Ga_r_1 ' i� >>^ '� "��n� � �� • �� o • v + � �' � �• •�� 1 �� • _ _ � �: i i � _ . �J � . " . '� � � � I e � • � ' s �T�---+'_i � . — / �� i��'�j'� ��^.:�'1� `� � n c' • ' ^a•• •a� a a�� K ��. )r�. "a „ • ' • � ° � �C ; � b � � o �� F � ° �` l� �� p �.I �' � � I ' .. C .. . � c . ' �� ' J • e G y � R �c � . a � �; � ,; Qef � �, i ' � ' �'__•i\ ; �s, ��` � a �11' t � � � �. <;J � i n = N I � � - � ' ' �' � E _ �i � _�-'� �`' _ V � � i � ' N . `' � � .�a � , rn �F, � _� � � � I I ,.;, �,��;;�' �.�. �� b � �� pL. �was� �+w �1 ' � G "G !` I � �{J �l'� : �w "�a ��"��.�' . \�� , r■( I / i = _ - � ' + : ��+�.�„�,�,�__. i ; i � �' ' l � J�\t ��r�� aw�� _ �V �'��:'_ �. I v ��'II I� �-1 �(''F'J'a"T�: I _ � =. �U� 'Y 'f �. `'' l (�^ `� r i I � �� i� `�' � � � ( r � �� • I _"�f `\', � I ;�y��''� "' 1 � � � ,�' ,r ��F �r � ;:: : � _ _ .. � `• , � t1: i L_.__� � � F 1° � L�� f � I��J �i �, .. I;�� i.. �f �. i � _� U��Ir�/ C,� `� ��--.hIY,' � \�', _� ��. ��:��"�_...-•�_. I� —� � _ � �u;,, � P � � C' I e G ^ q � ' � -- `l � sa � - --- ! �' C.. � �, ' : _ .,r ;T "� . . '. ' `� � t �19�J 1 � �r� , ,� , � s�_. .i::� �� iJVV� � G �� !, •' � j = � u C� � Y � • , ; ��'l ..�� .�—. � �� ' -��- �. r a � j e r. • �a.L �' � `;,�� ll ��I _ � °-�•.``�' ��'''` a �,�,�,;� � i , „ �y'"' � �' ; _- - - - = - ^,� "' —�c— � n .i! � - ��'!!]t; � .. I , i � ��• - �j,�, c � 1 ir.__ __ __ �..i , I i„ �, �, , . ! ' � �-_.;' % '� �iJ �1 F �' Li � i___I = -` "':": _ : . __ =` ; r i;, ,, K 6 � ; s +.�,� '�^• ' --_ - --• �' i �,,i L r �• , �� . / '. ° 11.....J i f • �-- � T ' I � - - - � 1/ � � R E 'a/ '71/ %'� 8 �on '� u .:—� � �r— IT �I , ,� �p�� ". ... ••--, y�% i,r.i . c� � c - • � - " �!� `'`-' `--�'� ' � � t .4 Y o . � �� ", o�� , ., =� ' �1; i _J � � � ' � " �/ ��° ^ r � � �. � � �I � �� I'°� � T ` � ' - 5" ' . �' '� - , � ' �!�r. �� " ' ° �_ � � I (�� 1 , � _ . � . ;�� , , .___, � ; � ,, -�-a,* � , _ i�. �i, , _,r — `�..d' _, �' � --�--- + — fi 1i�/ :/ _ ,; — City of Fridley TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �� , � FROM: John G. Flora, �ublic Works Director Jon H. H ukaas, Assistant Public Works Director � DATE: January 25, 1999 SUBJECT: Miscellaneous Concrete Curb and Gutter and Sidewalk Project No. 322 PW99-008 Attached is a resolution ordering advertisement for bids for the 1999 Miscellaneous Concrete Curb and Gutter and Sidewalk Project No. 322. This resolution is being provided for execution by the City as mandated by State law. This proj ect covers remedial sidewalk, curb repair and replacement in the City whether due to utility repairs or driveway entrance permits. Also included in this year's project is the replacement of damaged and deteriorated concrete curbing within the Riverview Heights Improvement Project area. Recommend the City Council adopt the attached resolution ordering advertisement for bid for the 1999 Miscellaneous Concrete Curb and Gutter and Sidewalk Project No. 322. THI3/JGF:cz Attachment 10.01 RESOLUTION NO. -1999 RESOLUTION ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS; 1999 - REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF MISCELLANEOUS CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER AND SIDEWALK PROJECT NO. 322 WHEREAS, the construction of certain improvements is deemed to be in the interest of the City of Fridley and the property owners affected thereby. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota as follows: That the following improvements proposed by Council Resolutions are hereby ordered to be effected and completed as required: Removal and replacement of miscellaneous concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk. 2. The plans and specifications prepared by the Public Works Director for such improvements are hereby approved and shall be filed with the City Clerk. The Public Works Director shall accordingly prepare and cause to be inserted in the official newspaper advertisements for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and speci�cations. The advertisements hall be published for three (3) weeks (at least 21 days), and shall specify the work to be done and will state that the bids will be opened and considered at 11:00 AM WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 17,1999, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Public Works Director. That the advertisement for bids for 1999 - REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF MISCELLANEOUS CURB AND GUTTER AND SIDEWALK PROJECT NO. 315 shall be substantially in the standard form. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 1999. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON, MAYOR 10.02 City of Fridley TO: William W. Burns, City Manager ,� � � � FROM: John G. F1ora�Public Works Director Jon H. Ha�kaas, Assistant Public Works Director DATE: January 25, 1999 SUBJECT: Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair Project No. 320 PW99-007 Within our 1999 budget we have identified funds for the restoration of our sanitary sewer lines. The sanitary repair work is concentrated on corrugated metal pipe which we are lining to extend its life and prevent further rusting and deterioration of the system. This yeaz's project consists of (1) 3,317 lineal feet of 12 inch CMP sanitary sewer pipe and (2) 3141ineal feet of 10 inch CMP sanitary sewer pipe. The 1999 budget has $170,000 budgeted for the sanitary sewer repair. Recommend the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing the staff to advertise for the Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair Project No. 320. J�II-i/JGF:cz Attachment 11.01 RESOLUTION NO. -1999 A RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT, APPROVAL OF PLANS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: SA1vITARY AND STORM SEWER REPAIIt PROJECT NO. 320 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fridley has established a policy of repair to sanitary and storm sewers when necessary, WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has submitted a plan showing the sanitary and storm sewers in need of repair, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the sanitary and storm sewers recommended for repair by the Public Works Departrnent be repaired, and the work involved in said improvement shall hereafter be designated as: SA1�tITARY AND STORM SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 320 2. The plans and specifications prepared by the Public Works Deparhnent for such improvement and each of them, pursuant to the Council action heretofore, are hereby approved and shall be filed with the City Clerk. 3. The work to be performed under SAIVITARY AND STORM SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 320 be performed under one contract. The Public Works Director shall accordingly prepare and cause to be inserted in the official newspaper advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for two (2) weeks (at least 10 days), and shall specify the work to be done and will state that bids will be opened at 10:00 a.m. on WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 17,1999, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the Public Works Director and accompanied by a cash deposit, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City of Fridley for five percent (5%) of the amount of such bid. That the advertisement for bids for SA1vITARY AND STORM SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 320 shall be substantially standard in form. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY TffiS 25TH DAY OF JANUARY,1999. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 11.02 b � � ,�`': t I I • t. T r � 1 8 • i a • .. ��O�tOM l�AC[< < � �OrAOC !T�[ET By � - i��yC• �TRCCT � 8" ■!OM a 1tRE[T ♦ z c� � sr�cEs T 0 < � � c � 1 � -. B•. r�/MIM�OM e�� , I � r'•F�I < • ,� • .O ti Ci � . A J[fF[11 �r . ��I � � = r e rAp1�OM e" fTlltlT �_ • a . . � 8� z � O Q < � � s � �. •vtMUE M a 0 a ~ . � 10 iNCH CMP Z • ` < 8M = , . . .� ' = ALTERNATE � TIYION S��EE' �� e„ ��'4 m = N 8 " ' 8�� IVC�A IAME � � O � _. �Opo �R��c g., _" PICRC( STREE� � 8�� z c .-�---�� ^ °�E��C s r �u - Q" 8•• n '`IA�IW�L .�l—� e • �^ _:•--- =�_� i ►� � ac� a m i 3� � ' ,�' G� F V _. � , [L..� T N'R�� 1 ,r I � �+ w /� ' a a ■OV I � r � �� .. _•__._ � 8'� n s . , � � � 0 �0�. T �- ( \ D � rw . a RI � � m �_ ��,� � � I _ _�'�--�—_ —��_"�_ � �o CITY UF FRIDLEY TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER ��1 FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE D/RECTOR SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHOR/Z/NG THE ISSUANCE OF �2,145,000 /N COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS (COLUMBJA PARK PROPERTIES) DATE: January 22, 1999 Attached you will find a resolution that we received from Daniel Greensweig, from the firm of Kennedy 8� Graven, who is representing Columbia Park Properties as their Bond Counsel. They are requesting that the City pass the attached resolution that will refund their "Series 1982 $4,000,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds Columbia Park Properties" and replace it with the issue described above. We did cooperate in a similar refinancing in the spring of 1992, subject to the condition that Columbia Park pay us an administrative fee of $24,750 and that they escrow $20,462 per year for capital improvements to the building. We also agreed to give them a credit toward future capital improvement requirements for capital investment that exceeded the required amounts. We have reviewed the information provided by Columbia Park Properties regarding the 1992 issue, and have found that the amount of capital invested in the building does exceed the value of the interest savings achieved from the past bond refinancing. The circumstances surrounding this bond refinancing are a bit different from those in 1992. In 1992 Columbia Park was reducing their interest rate on $3,105,000 from 14% to 7.5% and they faced 14 more years of debt amortization. In this instance, they are reducing their interest on $2,145,000 from 7.5% to somewhere between 5 and 5.5%. They are also looking at only 7 more years of amortization . This issue is similar in its form to the last issue that the City of Fridley approved. We have no obligation for this bond and it will be issued under Minnesota State Statutes as a type of conduit financing. The repayment for this bond will come from revenues generated by Columbia Park Properties. James O'Meara, from the firm of Briggs and Morgan, has reviewed the bond documents on behalf of the City of Fridley. Staff is recommending the approval of this resolution. RDP/me Attachment 12.01 RESOLi�TION of the CITY OF FRIDLEY RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CTTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA (THE "ISSL7ER") AUTHORIZING TI-� ISSUANCE, SALE AND DELIVERY OF THE ISSUER'S CONIlVIERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REFUNDING REVENUE BONDS (COLUMBIA PARK PROPERTIES L.L.P. - MEDICAL CLINIC PROJECT) SERIES 1999 (TI-� `BONDS"), WHICH BONDS AND TI� INTEREST AND ANY PREMNM THEREON SHALL BE PAYABLE SOLELY FROM REVENUES PLEDGED 'Ti-�RETO; APPROVING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF AN INDENTURE OF TRUST, A LOAN AGREEMENT, AND A BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT; CONSENTING TO TI-� DISTRIBUTION OF AN OFFICIAL STAT'EMENT; AND APPROVING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING TI� EXECUTION AND DELNERY OF THE BONDS WHEREAS, the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "Issuer") is a home rule city duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, particularly Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 to 469.1651, as amended (the "Act"), the Issuer is authorized to carry out the public purposes described therein and contemplated thereby by issuing its revenue bonds to finance the cost of the acquisition, renovation, construction, improving and equipping of certain revenue producing facilities to be located within its corporate boundaries, and is authorized to enter into revenue agreements made in connection therewith and pledge those agreements as security for the payment of the principal of and interest on any such revenue bonds; and WHEREAS, the Issuer has previously issued its $4,000,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (Columbia Park Properties Project), Series 1982 (the "1982 Bonds"); and WHEREAS, the Issuer loaned the proceeds of the 1982 Bonds to Columbia Park Properties, a Minnesota general partnership (the "Partnership") for the purpose of acquiring, constructing and equipping a commercial facility within the corporate boundaries of the Issuer (the "ProjecY'); and WHEREAS, the Issuer issued its Commercial Development Refunding Revenue Bonds (Columbia Park Properties - Medical Clinic Project) Series 1992, in an aggregate principal amount of $3,105,000 (the "1992 Bonds"), to provide for the funding of a loan (the "Loan") to the Partnership for the purpose of refunding and redeeming the 1982 Bonds in accordance with their terins; and WHEREAS, Columbia Park Properties L.L.P. (the "Company"), has represented to the Issuer that it is the successor to the Partnership, and the Company has requested the Issuer to issue its Commercial Development Refunding Revenue Bonds (Columbia Park Properties L.L.P. - Medical Clinic Project), Series 1999, m an aggregate principal amount of $2,145,000 (the "Bonds"), to provide for the funding of a loan (the "Loan") to the Company for the purpose of refunding and redeeming the 1992 Bonds in accordance with their terms; and WHEREAS, the Loan will be made pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement dated as of March l, 1999 (the "Loan Agreement"), between the Issuer and the Company; and , DJG-156853 CL162-15 12�0� WHEREAS, the Issuer proposes to finance the refunding and redemption of the 1992 Bonds under the Act by the issuance of the Bonds of the Issuer under this resolution; and WHEREAS, the Bonds will be issued under an Indenture of Trust, dated as of March 1, 1999 (the "Indenture"), between the Issuer and the trustee named therein (the "Trustee"), and are secured by a Mortgage, Security Agreement, Assignment of Leases and Rents, and Fixture Financing Statement dated as of March 1, 1999 (the "Mortgage"), from the Company to the Issuer, and assigned by the Issuer to the Trustee pursuant to the Assignment of Mortgage, dated as of March 1, 1999 (the "AssignmenY') and a pledge and assignment of certain other revenues, all in accordance with the terms of the Indenture, and said Bonds and the interest on said Bonds shall be payable solely from the revenues pledged therefor and the Bonds shall not constitute a general or moral obligation or a debt of the Issuer within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation or constitute or give rise to a pecuniary liability of the Issuer or a charge against its general credit or taxing powers and shall not constitute a chazge, lien, or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the Issuer other than the Issuer's interest in the Project. NOW, TI�REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TI� CTTY COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. For the purposes set forth above, there aze hereby authorized the issuance, sale and delivery of the Bonds in a principal amount of $2,145,000. T'he Bonds shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall bear interest, shall mature, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, shall be in such form, and shall have such other details and provisions as are prescribed in the Indenture substantially in the form now on file with the Issuer (or as amended in accordance with this resolution). 2. The Bonds shall be special obligations of the Issuer payable solely from the revenues provided pursuant to the Loan Agreement and other funds and revenues pledged pursuant to the Indenture. The City Council of the Issuer hereby authorizes the Mayor and the City Manager of the Issuer (together, the "Officials") to execute and deliver the Indenture by and between the Issuer and the Trustee, and to deliver to said Trustee the Indenture, and hereby authorizes the execution of the Bonds in accordance with the Indenture. The Indenture shall be substantially in the form on file with the Issuer, with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as do not materially change the substance thereof, or as the City Manager, in his discretion, shall deternune, and the execution thereof by the Ciry Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such deternunation. 3. The Officials aze hereby authorized to execute and deliver the Loan Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement by and among John G. Kinnazd & Company, Incorporated (the "Underwriter"), the Company and the Issuer (the "Bond Purchase AgreemenY'). The Loan Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement shall be substantially in the forms on file with the Issuer, with such omissions and insertions as do not materially change the substance thereof, or as the City Manager, in his discretion, shall determine, and the execution thereof by the City Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such deternunation. 4. The Bonds shall be revenue obligations of the Issuer the proceeds of which shall be disbursed pursuant to the Indenture and the I.oan Agreement, and the principai, premium and interest on the Bonds shall be payable solely from the proceeds of the Bonds, the Loan Agreement and amounts realized under the Mortgage. 5. The Officials aze hereby authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the Issuer, such other afiidavits, certificates, and other documents as aze necessary or appropriate in connection with the issuance, sale, and delivery of the Bonds, including an endorsement to the Company azbitrage certificate, and all other documents and certificates as shall be necessary and appropnate in connection with the issuance, sale and delivery of the Bonds. . DJG156641 CL162-15 12203 6. The Issuer has not participated in the prepazation of the Preliminary Official Statement or the Official Statement relating to the Bonds (the "Official Statement") and has made no independent review or investigation with respect to the information contained therein, including any appendices thereto, and the Issuer assumes no responsibility for the sufficiency, accuracy or completeness of such information. Subject to the foregoing, the Issuer hereby consents to the distribution of the Official Statement by the Underwriter in connection with the sale of the Bonds. 7. No covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement herein contained or contained in the aforementioned documents shall be deemed to be a covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement of any member of the City Council of the Issuer, or any officer, agent or employee of the Issuer in that person's individual capacity, and neither the Ciry Council of the Issuer nor any o�cer or employee executing the Bonds shall be liable personally on the Bonds or be subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof. No provision, covenant or agreement contained in the aforementioned documents, the Bonds or in any other document related to the Bonds, and no obligation therein or herein imposed upon the Issuer or the breach thereof, shall constitute or give rise to any pecuniary liability of the Issuer or any charge upon its general credit or taxing powers. In making the agreements, provisions, covenants and representations set forth in such documents, the Issuer has not obligated itself to pay or remit any funds or revenues, other than funds and revenues derived from the Loan Agreement which aze to be applied to the payment of the Bonds, as provided therein and in the Indenture. 8. The Bonds, when executed and delivered, shall contain a recital that they aze issued pursuant to the Act. 9. In the event that for any reason the Mayor of the Issuer is unable to carry out the execution of any of the documents or other acts provided herein, any other member of the City Council of the Issuer sha11 be authorized to act in his capacity and undertake such execution or acts on behalf of the Issuer with full force and effect, which executions or acts shall be valid and binding on the Issuer. If for any reason the City Manager of the Issuer is unable to execute and deliver the documents referred to in this Resolution, such documents may be executed by a member of the City Council or the City Clerk with the same force and effect as if such documents were executed and delivered by the City Manager of the Issuer. 10. This resolution shall be effective from and after the date of adoption by the City Council of the Issuer. � Adopted: , 1999 Mayor Attest: City Clerk DJG-156641 CL162-15 12304 � � QTY OF FRIOLEY MEMORANDUM Memo To: William W. Burns, City Manager �� 6� From: Sara S. Hill, Human Resources Manager Subject: Date: � � `. � Sara S. Hill Huinan Resources Manager (612) 572-3� 07 Labor Agreement with International Union of Operating Engineers Local No. 49 January 13, 1999 The employees of the City of Fridley represented by the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local Union No. 49, have voted to accept the offer made by the City on December 15, 1998. This will involve the following changes to the present 1997-1998 contract: l. Article X. Overtime Pay. All hours worked on a holiday will be paid at double (2) times the base rate of pay. 2. Article XIX. Insurance (Employer monthly premiums) The Employer's maximum contribution toward group health and life insurance for 1999 will be $378.00 for employees choosing dependent coverage, and $230.00 per month for employees choosing single coverage. For employees choosing the cash option, the amount has been increased to $181.00. In 2000, members of the bargaining unit will receive the same amount as approved by the City Council for non-union employees. 3. Appendix A. Wages. The new contract allows for a five percent increase of all wage rates in 1999 over those of 1998. It also allows for a three percent increase of all wage rates in 2000. Advancement to the next step will take place on the employee's actual anniversary date. � 5 Annual Leave Buy Back. Employees may sell five (5) days of their annual leave back to the City after completion of five (5) years of service. Educadon Assistance. The City will now pay a maximum of $2,925.00 per employee per calendar year for tuition assistance. I have prepared a resolution, and I request that you present it to the Fridley CiXy Council for consideration at its meeting of January 25, 1999. 1 13.01 Z � 0 Z � C.) O -.J t�i �. r+ � < Z v: � Y � � X d � tL O � s n � W � � O � Z W � W J F- H W h < � � Z � � A �v� G w1 Y � C � O A Y V L � Y m A > � n` v � = o V � M w � � N I ` O , C � O � V � � A � � � O Au' W N w A m V > c N 3i L 'u y > < - N= �S =;o .e 1 l � C � 3'- 3 = � a+ s, i �. = =, ' Z '� � b � _ - i ,n � ,n �3, �c .�r � v. � M? .� .n Y �. ; _ ; � ! C ; - = 2= Zi Z:J 2 x v I I < > �n �n v� j � N � � 2 � ` Y •� = G '� � 3 x � '°z= t�1 y ^ d � T � — s J c x ^ -. J N �p t� �! u1 �O O p `0 7 �o � �M O e� M � � �� .� 7 N '-�[�•-� � � C C� j � � � �7 n n N y Y � Vvf C 3 & 3 � � d € � > - > C = � .� � ' � � _ �n 'a = M � M M � M � � 3 � > ; C 3 ' Z � Z � Z�J Z .r^ M � ^ O� ^ M � N � `Si �, T N 47 � N � � ~ � C L � N � C � i .'? • y '_ _ 3 �� _v'� N � Vf Y � � � � � A A � c :J m � � 7 � � � � i ^ = � � 6! n z 7 Z : Z = 2 _ N ` C N � R �c C � � � V < R R � � °�� $5 N: _ _ _ S s � O O O O O O O� ' V � 7 ? C � � � � 6i f C+ k C: M � M � M � Z � Z � Z c O N • O O O O O O O op N O `O �O O n T � N n r1 A v � � ` � ` e: �� — C A � � � 5 � 5 s C � C ¢ C 2" I � � � � � _ _ v " I r. �C : � „�j =� � � n I ^ � � � � � � � I v ✓, _ � � � v _ M .� _ Y � I _ � 3 y M � M � MZ _ � Z ' C _ �' I ^ � � Z �. Z ` ` � � f ` � ^ 2 � � � � f � � J Z' Z _ _�,,, I =�` c � � � 1!: , ^ � ... ' �!'. y� y1 V, ^ � u^ N� �.� C� y � • Y R I �= �- �� 9�E� �,= � a= �e 5 � ' m� mU m:J m�U c^ � o uo M O n O �p � O� �O �i Ci Ci �t N r S" S'� "O �t n ^ �il n � v1 p v T �� r C 4 C r r � � � S � � v � Y ._ — �C _ � ` V1 W � � M �' � �, _ � � ` k '0 3 y c r. - 3� «� ai .�. _ .� ii .+ ' 4 Z — _ ,� � ; � 3 ` 3 ' 3 ' € � 2` �. � ' 2= Zv ZV ZS:J �z'-� zv; - KM W O �O �O M �1 M N G� � �' M �O � � S' p�. � N T � �'1 P1 n n ^ � '� � � � � � • v� � i: p�yy z� � `� �� ., � C'Ek >C � � � d m� C U C � C W(,1 -�. � . � � � ^ � M \ � pp � Lf1 O O A M M O �p M p p O tlP N C N C1N 6J�v N � � 0 O N � u ; 7 7 O O \ \ \ op �! e} � `+n �` < ^ S' r r �f O �' � �y, 1.+-:. = � : ' I rn - - _ .-. A ^ N� N N V R�. � n � p� � — !y 1�. rr � } � d . � V "' ^ � � N � ~ . N � N N ^ R � k� � C `' C � � Y L 6' 3= 3 .�c ^`- � ` • _ - �E _ � :+d = - �1 �, � >, � X .� . ,� ."�. ` -� vi � S � w� C L 6; = � (%f � � y � 6+ N S f%% Y ; � u � J .0 � ` '� � ^_i � � � � 3 G � � � L � N� N� M� M d' � y� C M C � •� � C `� � C C r �� .. � _ �� ; � - ^ r 10 IC M�0 � d M J N� M H� Z C v� � � ��i- Z � 2 � Z .. Z � � a3i � 3 9 � _ °3' � °3' •� � � � E � R - � � � v \ O V Z N Z — �� Z� Z' Z:i Z�:: �= � Cf1 N M il1 O O . p �~ . ^ M N , I � 0 a) M O ul .� q � ^ � O O O � > ^ o ^ o 0 00 � �o � ^ o an �o � o � � � '.^ m^ ^ �`� ''4. � �- r r � � - "� ° _ :e n q^ �, ,,, .,. � � _ � � _ � � � - � � H 3 k= `s' � c ^ y � � _ _ - q � " � ^ e, N � L C � C � � � ` v � � C C x T R � �� ` � 4 } = --� — —= _= _— -- _� —=_ __ � � � � � I I I � � � � 1 N T I � I = O ( � d r � I � � I e = ' 2` c I G ' I � ' I I I I I � I I f I � i G� i� I � n N PV I C ' I r r � � �; s: _ � � I � � � � f �=' I � � , RESOLUTION NO. -1999 RESOLUTION AU'I'HORIZPI 1G SIGNni 1G AN AGREEMENT FOR CERTAPi E;VIPLOYEES REPRESENTED BY I�ITERNAT'IONAL UI�TION OF OPERATING ENG�iEERS, LOCAL NO. 49, AFL-CIO (PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE) FOR 1999 AND 2000 WHEREAS, the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 49, AFL-CIO, as bargaining representative for certain Public Works Maintenance employees of the City of Fridley, has presented to the City of Fridley various requests relat�ng to the wages and working conditions of employees of the Public Works Department of the City of Fndley; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has presented to the designated representatives of Loca149 various requests relating to the wages and working conditions of employees of the Public Works Department of the City of Fridley; and WHEREAS, representatives of the Union and the City have met and negotiated regarding the requests of the Union and the City; and WHEREAS, agreement has now been reached between representatives of the two parties on the proposed changes to the existing agreement between the City and the Union; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Fridley that such agreement is hereby ratified and that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to sign the attached Labor Agreement including Appendix A and Appendix B relating to wages and working conditions of employees of the City of Fridley Public Works Department. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS TH DAY OF , 1999. DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR E 13.03 LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL NO. 49 AFL-CIO 1999 and 2000 13.04 LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL NO. 49 AFL-CIO 1999 and 2000 ARTICLE I ARTICLE II ARTICLE III ARTICLE IV ARTICLE V ARTICLE VI ARTICLE VII ARTICLE VIII ARTICLE IX ARTICLE X ARTICLE XI ARTICLE XII ARTICLE XIII ARTICLE XIV ARTICLE XV Page PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 RECOGNITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 UNION SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 EMPLOYER SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 EMPLOYER AUTHORITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 EMPLOYEE RIGHT'S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 SAVINGS CLAUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 WORK SCHEDULES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 OVERTIME PAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 CALL BACK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 LEGAL DEFENSE ................................8 RIGHT OF SUBCONTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 DISCIPLINE ....................................8 SENIORITY .....................................8 13.05 ARTICLE XVI PROBATIONARY PERIODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 ARTICLE XVII SAFETY .......................................9 ARTICLE XVIII JOB POSTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ARTICLE XIX INSURANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ARTICLE XX ANNUAL LEAVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 ARTICLE XXI SHORT TERM DISABILITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 ARTICLE XXII STANDBY PAY AND MINIMUM CALLBACK. . . . . . . . . . . .11 ARTICLE XXIII EMPLOYE EDUCATION PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 ARTICLE XXIV FUNERAL PAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 ARTICLE XXV JURY PAY AND WITNESS FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 ARTICLE XXVI MILITARY LEAVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 ARTICLE XXVII INCENTIVE PAY (LONGEVITY) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :13 ARTICLE XXVIII HOLIDAYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 ARTICLE XXIX UNIFORMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 ARTICLE XXX REPRESENTATIVE OF AREA WIDE NEGOTIATIONS. .....14 ARTICLE XXXI INSURANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 ARTICLE XXXII WAIVER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 ARTICLE XXXIII DURATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 APPENDIXA .................................................16 APPENDIXB .................................................17 13.06 LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL NO. 49 AFL-CIO ARTICLE I. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is entered into between the CITY OF FRIDLEY, hereinafter called the EMPLOYER, and the Local No. 49, International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL- CIO, hereinafter called the UNION. It is the intent and purpose of the AGREEMENT to: 1.1 Establish certain hours, wages and other conditions of employment; 1.2 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning this AGREEMENT'S interpretation and/or application; and 1.3 Specify the full and complete understanding of the parties; and 1.4 Place in written form the parties' agreement upon terms and conditions of employment for the duration of this AGREEMENT. The EMPLOYER and the UNION, through the AGREEMENT, continue their dedication to the highest quality of public service. Both parties recognize this AGREEMENT as a pledge of this dedication. ARTICLE II. RECOGNITION The EMPLOYER recognizes the UNION as the exclusive representative in a unit as certified by the Minnesota Bureau of Mediation Services. ARTICLE III. UNION SECURITY In recognition of the UNION as the exclusive representative, the EMPLOYER shall: FI 13.07 3.1 Deduct each payroll peri established by the UNION such deduction, and 3.2 3.3 od an amount sufficient to provide the payment of dues from the wages of all employees authorizing in writing Remit such deduction to the appropriate designated officer of the UNION. The UIVION may designate certain employees from the bargaining unit to act as stewards and shall inform the EMPLOYER in writing of such choice. 3.4 The UNION agrees to indemnify and hold the EMPLOYER harmless against any and all claims, suits, orders, or judgments brought or issued against the CITY under the provisions of this Article. ARTICLE IV. EMPLOYER SECURITY The UNION agrees that during the life of this AGREEMENT it will not cause, encourage, participate in or support any strike, slow-down or other interruption of or interference with the normal functions of the EMPLOYER. ARTICLE V. EMPLOYER AUTHORITY 5.1 The EMPLOYER retains the fi�ll and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower, facilities, and equipment; to establish fiinctions and programs; to set and amend budgets; to determine the utilization of technology; to establish and modify the organizational structure; to select, direct, and determine the number of personnel; to establish work schedules and to perform any inherent managerial function not specifically limited by this AGREEMENT. 5.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established this AGREEMENT shall remain solely within the discretion of the modify, establish, or eliminate. ARTICLE VI. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS -- GRIEVANCE PROC�DURE 6.1 6.2 DEFINITION OF A GRIEVANCE or modified by EMPLOYER to A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the interpretation or application of the specific terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. UNION REPRESENTATIVES The EMPLOYER will recognize REPRESENTATIVES designated by the UNION as the grievance representatives of the bargaining unit having the duties and responsibilities established by the Article. The UNION shall notify the EMPLOYER in writing of the names of such UNION REPRESENTATIVES and of their successors when so designated. F �C 1 : 6.3 PROCESSING OF A GRIEVANCE It is recognized and accepted by the UNION and the EMPLOYER that the processing of grievances as hereinafter provided is limited by job duties and responsibilities of the EMPLOYEES and shall therefore be accomplished during normal working hours only when consistent with such EMPLOYEE duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved EMPLOYEE and the Ur1ION REPRESENTATIVE shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in pay when a grievance is investigated and presented to the EMPLOYER during normal working hours provided that the EMPL,OYEE and the UNION REPRESENTATIVE have notified and received the approval of the designated supervisor who has determined that such absence is reasonabie and would not be detrimental to the work programs of the EMPLOYER. 6.4 PROCEDURE Grievances, as defined by Section 6.1, shall be resolved in conference with the following procedure: Step 1 • An EMPLOYEE claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this AGREEMENT shall, within twenty-one (21) calendar days after such alleged violation has occurred, present such grievance to the EMPLOYEE'S supervisor as designated by the EMPLOYER. The EMPLOYER-designated representative will discuss and give an answer to such Step 1 grievance within ten (10) calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved in Step 1 and appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writina setting forth the nature of the grievance, the facts on which it is based, the provision of provisions of the AGREEMENT allegediy violated, and the remedy requested and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10) calendar days after the EMPLOYER-designated representative's final answer in Step 1. Any gnevance not appealed in writing to Step 2 by the UNION within ten (10) days shall be considered waived. Step 2• If appealed, the written grievance shail be presented by the UNION and discussed with the EMPLOYER-designated Step 2 representative. The EMPLOYER- designated representative shall give the UNION the EMPLOYER'S Step 2 answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to Step 3 within ten (10) calendar days following the EMPLOYER-designated representative's final Step 2 answer. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by the UNION within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waiyed. 3 13.09 Step 3• If appealed, the written grievance shall be presented by the UNION and discussed with the EMPLOYER-designated Step 3 representative. The EMPLOYER- designated representative shall give the UNION the EMPLOYER'S answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of such Step 3 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 3 may be appealed to Step 4 within ten (10) calendar days fol(owing the EMPLOYER-designated representative's final answer in Step 3. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 4 by the UNION within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 4• A grievance unresolved in Step 3 and appealed in Step 4 shall be submitted to the Minnesota Bureau of Mediation Services. A grievance not resolved in Step 4 may be appealed to Step 5 within ten (10) calendar days foilowing the EMPLOYER'S final answer in Step 4. Any grievance not appealed in writin� to Step 5 by the TJNION within ten (10) calendar days shall be considered waived. Step 5. A grievance unresolved in Step 4 and appealed in Step 5 shall be submitted to arbitration subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Act of 1971, as amended. If the parties cannot agree upon an arbitrator the selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the "Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances" as established by the Public Employment Relations Board. 6.5 ARBITRATOR'S AUTHOR[TY A. The arbitrator shall have no riaht to amend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to, or subtract from the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. The arbitrator shall consider and decide only the specific issue(s) submitted in writing by the EMPLOYER and the UNION, and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other issue(s) not so submitted. B. The arbitrator shail be without power to make decisions contrary to or inconsistent with, or modifying or varying in any way the application of laws, niles, or regulations havina the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be sub►nitted�in writing within thirty (30) days following the close of the hearing or the submission of briefs by the parties, whichever be later, unless the parties agree to an extension. The decision shall be binding on both the EMPLOYER and the UNION and shail be based solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the express terms of this AGREEMEI�IT and to the facts of the grievance presented. 0 13.10 C. The fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne equally by the EMPLOYER and the UIVION provided that each party shall be responsible for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a verbatim record of the proceedings, it may cause such a record to be made, providing it pays for the record. If both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings, the cost shall be shared equally. 6.6 WAIVER If a grievance is not presented within limits set forth above, it shall be considered "waived" . If a grievance is not appealed to the next step within the specified time limit or any agreed extension thereof, it shall be considered setded on the basis of the EMPLOYER'S last answer. If the EMPLOYER does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof within the specified time limits, the UIVION may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step may be extended by mutual agreement of the EMPLOYER and the UNION. 6.7 CHOICE OF REMEDY If, as a result of the EMPL.OYER response in Step 4, the grievance remains unresolved, and if the grievance involves the suspension, demotion, or discharge of an employee who has completed the required probationary period, the grievance may be appealed to Step 5 of Article VI or a procedure such as: Civil Service, Veteran's Preference, or Fair Employment. If appealed to any procedure other than Step 5 of Article VI, the grievance is not subject to the arbitration procedure as provided in Step 5 or Article VI. The aggrieved employee shall indicate in writing which procedure is to be utilized (Step 5 or Article VI or another appeal procedure) and shall sign a statement to the effect that the choice of any other hearing precludes the aggrieved employee from making a subsequent appeal through Step 5 of Article VI. ARTICLE VII. DEFINITIONS 7.1 UrTION The International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 49, AFL-CIO. 7.2 EMPLOYER The City of Fridley. 7.3 UNION MEMBER A member of the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 49, AFL-CIO. 5 13.11 7.4 EMPLOYEE A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit. 7.5 BASE RATE OF PAY The Employee's hourly pay rate exclusive of longevity or any other special allowance. 7.6 SENIORITY I.ength of continuous service in any job classifications covered by ARTICLE II-- RECOGNITION. Employees who are promoted from job classification covered by this AGREEMENT and return to a job classification covered by the AGREEMENT shall have their seniority calculated on their length of service under this AGREEMENT for purposes of promotion, transfer and lay off and total length of service with the EMPLOYER for other benefit under this AGREEMENT. 7.7 SEVERANCE PAY Payment made to an employee upon honorable termination of employment. 7.8 OVERTIME Work performed at the express authorization of the EMPLOYER in excess of either eight (8) hours within a twenty-four (24) hour period (except for shift changes) or more than forty (40) hours within a seven (7) day period. 7.9 CALL BACK Return of an employee to a specified work site to perform assigned duties at the express authorization of the EMPLOYER " at a time other than an assigned shift. An extension of or early report to an assigned shift is not a call back. 7.10 STANDBY PAY Compensation for standing by at the City's request, or being available for work on days that are normally considered to be employee's day off. ARTICLE VIII. SAVINGS CLAUSE The AGREEMENT is subject to the laws of the United States, the State of Minnesota and the signed municipality. In the event any provision of this AGREEMENT shall be held to be contrary to law by a court of competent jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within the time provided, such provisions shall be voided. � 13.12 All other provisions of the AGREEMENT shall continue in full force and effect. The voided provision may be renegotiated at the request of either party. ARTICLE IX: WORK SCHEDULES 9.1 The sole authority in work schedules is the EMPLOYER. The normal work day for an employee shall be eight (8) hours. The normal work week shall be forty (40) hours Monday through Friday. 9.2 Service to the public may require the establishment of regular shifts for some employees on a daily, weekly, seasonal, or annual basis other than the normal 7:OOAM -3:30PM day. The EMPLOYER will give seven (7) days advance notice to the employees �ffected by the establishment of work days different from the employee's normal eight (8) hour work day. 9.3 In the event that work is required because of unusual circumstances such as (but not limited to) fire, flood, snow, sleet, or breakdown of municipal equipment or facilities, no advance notice need by given. It is not required that an employee working other than the normal workday be scheduled to work more than the eight (8) hours; however, each employee has an obligation to work overtime or call backs if requested unless unusual circumstances prevent the employee from so working. 9.4 Service to the public may require the establishment of regular work weeks that schedule work on Saturdays and/or Sundays. . ARTICLE X. OVERTIME PAY 10.1 Hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours within a twenty-four (24) hour period (except for shift changes) or more than forty (40) hours within a seven (7) day period will be compensated for at one and one-half (1 1/2) times the employee's regular base pay rate. 10.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable. 10.3 Overtime refused by employees will for record purposes under ARTICLE 10.2 be considered as unpaid overtime worked. 10.4 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation, overtime hours worked shall not be pyramided, compounded, or paid twice for the same hours worked. ARTICLE XI. CALL BACK An employee called in for work at a time other than the employee's normal scheduled shift will be compensated for a minimum of two (2) hours' pay at one and one-half (1 1/2) times the employee's base pay rate. �J 13.13 ARTICLE XII. LEGAL DEFENSE 12.1 Employees involved in litigation because of negligence, ignorance of laws, non- observance of laws, or as a result of employee judgmental decision may not receive legal defense by the municipality. 12.2 Any employee who is charged wrth a traffic violation, ordinance violation or criminal offense arising from acts performed within the scope of the employee's employment, when such act is performed in good faith and under direct order of the employee's supervisor, sha(i be reimbursed for reasonable attorney's fees and court costs acfually incurred by such employee in defending against such charge. ARTICLE XIII. RIGHT OF SUBCONTRACT � Nothing in this AGREEMENT shall prohibit or restrict the right of the EMPLOYER from subcontracting work performed by employees covered by this AGREEMEIVT. ARTICLE XIV. DISCIPL[NE 14.1 The EMPLOYER will discipline employees only for just cause. 14.2 An employee(s) will not be required to participate in an investigatory interview by the EMPLOYER where the information gained from the interview could lead to the discipline of the employee(s) unless the employee(s) is given the opportunity to have a third party or the Union Representative present at the interview to act as a witness for the employee(s). ARTICLE XV. SEI�tIORITY 15.1 Seniority will be the determininQ criterion for transfers, promotions and lay-offs only when all job-relevant qualifications factors are equal. 15.2 Seniority will be the determinin� criterion for recall when the job-relevant qualification factors are equal. Recall rights under this provision will continue for twenty-four (24) months after lay off. Recalled employees shall have ten (10) working days after notification �of recall by registered mail at the employee's last known address to report to work or forfeit all recall rights. ARTICLE XVI. PROBATIONARY PERIODS 16.1 Every newly hired or rehired employee will serve a twelve (12) month probationary period. 16.2 Every empioyee wilt serve a twelve (12) month probationary period in any job classification in which the employee has not served a probationary period. : 13.14 16.3 At any time during the probationary period, a newly hired or rehired employee may be terminated at the sole discretion of the EMPLOYER. 16.4 At any time during the probationary period; a promoted or reassigned employee may be demoted or reassigned to the employee's previous position at the sole discretion of the EMPLOYER. ARTICLE XVII. SAFETY The EMPLOYER and the UNION agree to jointly promote safe and healthful working conditions, to cooperate in safety matters and to encourage employees to work in a safe manner. ARTICLE XVIII. JOB POSTING 18.1 The EMPLOYER and the UNION a�ree that permanent job vacancies within the designated bargaining unit shall be filled based on the concept of promotion or transfer from within provided that applicants: 18.11 have the necessary qualifications to meet the standards of the job vacancy;and 18.12 have the ability to perform the duties and responsibilities of the job vacancy. 18.2 Employees filling a higher job ciass based on the provisions of the ARTICLE shall be subject to the conditions of ARTICLE XVI (PROBATIONARY PERIOD). 18.3 The EMPLOYER has the right of final decision in the selection of employees to fill posted jobs based on qualifications, abilities and experience. 18.4 Job vacancies within the designated bargaining unit will be posted for five (5) working days so that members of the bargaining unit can be considered for such vacancies. ARTICLE XIX. INSURANCE 19.1 The EMPLOYER will contribute up to a maximum of three hundred seventy-eight dollars ($378.00) per month per EMPLOYEE toward group health and life insurance for EMPLOYEES choosing dependent coverage for calendar year 1999 and the same amount as approved by the City Council for non-union employees in 2000. 19.2 The EMPLOYER will contribute up to a maximum of two hundred thirty dollars ($230.00) per month per EMPLOYEE toward group health and life insurance for EMPLOYEES choosing single coverage for calendar year 1999 and the same amount as approved by the City Council for non-union employees 2000. 9 13.15 19.3 By mutual agreement EMPLOYEES may use fifteen dollars ($15.00) of the per month per employee of health insurance dollars in 19.1 and 19.2 for dental insurance for all unit EMPLOYEES. 19.4 EMPLOYEES not choosing dependent coverage cannot be covered at EMPLOYER expense for any additional insurance than the individual group health and group life insurance. Additional life insurance can be purchased by EMPLOYEES at the EMPLOYEE'S expense to the extent allowed under the EMPLOYER'S group policy. ARTICLE XX. ANNUAL LEAVE 20.1 Each employee shall be entitled to annual leave away from employment with pay. Annual leave may be used for scheduled or emergency absences from employment. Annual leave pay shall be computed at the regular rate of pay to which such an employee is entitled; provided, however, that the amount of any compensation shall be reduced by any payment received by the employee from workers' compensation insurance, Public Employees Retirement Associat�on disability insurance, or Social Security disability insurance. An employee's accumulation of annual leave will be reduced only by the amount of annual leave for which the employee receives compensation. 20.2 Seniority shall apply on scheduled annual leave up to May lst of each year. After May lst, scheduled annual leave shall be on a first come, first served basis. 20.3 A beginning employee shall accnie annual leave at the rate of eighteen (18) days per year for the first seven (7) years (84 successive months). An employee who has worked seven (7) years (84 siiccessive months) shall accrue anrnial leave at the rate oF t�venty-four (24) days per year, beginning with the eighty-fifth (85th) month of successive employment. An employee who has worked fifteen (15) years (180 successive months) shall accrtie annual leave at the rate of twenty-six (26) days per year, beginning with the one hundred eighty-first (181st) month of consecutive employment. T'hese rates are based on a forty (40) hour regular work week. The actual amount credited to an employee in any given pay period shall be prorated according to the actual number of regular hours worked during that pay period. Hours worked on overtime, callback, or standby shall not enter into the calculation of the accn�al of annual leave. 20.4 The maximum total accumulation of annual leave at the end of any given year shall be thirty (30) days. Once a year, at a time designated by the City, an employee who has completed five (5) years of service with the City w�ll have the opportunity to exchange up to five (5) days of accumulated annual leave for cash. 20.5 Upon separation from emptoyment with the City, an employee will be paid one (1) day's salary for each day of accnied annual leave remaining in the employee's balance. l0 13.16 ARTICLE XXI. SHORT TERM DISABILITY 21.1 Each employee who has successfully completed the employee's probationary period shall be eligible for the short term disability benefit. Such an employee shall be entitled to full pay commencing on the twenty-first (21st) consecutive working day on which the employee is absent due to a physician-certified illness or injury off the job, and continuing until the employee returns to work able to carry out the full duties and responsibilities of the employee's position or through the one hundred and tenth (110th) working day of absence, whichever occurs first. Such an employee shall also be entitled to full pay commencing on the eleventh (llth) consecutive working day on which the employee is absent due to a physician-certified illness or injury on the job and continuing until the employee returns to work able to carry out the duties and responsibilities of the employee's position or through the one hundredth (IOOth) working day of absence, whichever occurs first. The amount of any compensation for the short term disability benefit shall be reduced by any payment received by the disabled employee from workers' compensation insurance, Public Employees Retirement Association disability insurance, or Social Security disability insurance. Payment of short term disability benefit by the City to an employee shall not exceed ninety (90) working days for any single illness or injury, regardless of the number and spacing of episodes. The annual leave balance of an employee receivinQ short term disability benefit shall not be reduced, nor shall such employee accnie annual leave during that period. 21.2 Before any short term disability payments are made by the City to an employee, the City may request and is entitled to receive a certificate signed by a competent physician or other medical attendant certifying to the fact that the entire absence was, in fact, due to the illness or injury and not othenvise. The City also reserves the right to have an examination made at any time of any employee claiming payment under the short term disability benefit. Such examination may be made on behalf of the City by any competent person designated by the City when the City deems the same to be reasonably necessary to verify the illness or injury claimed. 21.3 If an employee hired before J«ly 1, 1983, has received payments under the injury-on-duty provisions of previous contracts, the number of days for which payment was received will be deducted from the number of days of el�gibility for coverage under short term disability for that same injury. ARTICLE XXII. STANDBY PAY AND NfINIMUM CALI.BACK FOR STANDBY EMPLOYEES 22.1 Employees who are designated by the City Manager to serve in a"standby" status on behalf of the City on a Saturday, Sunday or Holiday will receive as compensation for such service as "standby" two (2) hours of overtime pay for each day served in such status. 22.2 Employees required to "standby" during the week will receive as compensation for such service four (4) hours pay at the overtime rate. 11 13.17 ARTICLE XXX. REPRESENTATIVE ON AREA WIDE NEGOTIATIONS If the UNI01�1 chooses to use one o.f the personnel from the Fridley work force as a representative on the area wide bargaining unit for more than one year in three, Local No. 49 will pay the salary oE such Employee for the second year for the time spent on area wide negotiations. The purpose is to spread the cost of such negotiation among the several communities involved in joint negotiations. ARTICLE XXXI. INSURANCE The City will provide group term life insurance with a maximum of $25,000 per Employee and additional accidental death and disability insurance with a maximum of $25,000 per Employee. Provided that the total City cost for all insurance premiums does not exceed the amount set forth in ARTICLE XIX. ART[CLE XXXII. WAIVER 32.1 Any and all prior aareements, resolutions, practiczs, policies, niles and regulations regarding terms and conditions of employment, to the extent inconsistent this the provisions of this AGREEMENT, are hereby superseded. 32.2 The parties mutually acknowledQe that during the ne�otiations which resulted in this AGREEMENT, each had the unlimited right and opportunity to make demands and proposals with respect to any term or condition of employment not removed by law from bargaining. All agreements and understandin�s arrived at by the parties are set forth in writina in this AGREEMENT for the stipulated duration of the AGREEMENT.� The EMPLOYER and the UNION each voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives the riaht to meet and negotiate regarding any and all terms and conditions of empioyment referred to or covered in this AGREEMENT or with respect to any term or condition of employment not specificaily referred to or covered by this AGREEMENZ', even though such terms or conditions may not have been within the knowledge or contemplation of either or both of the parties at the time this contract was negotiated or executed. ARTICLE XXXIII. DURATIOIV The AGREEMENT shall be effective as of January 1, 19�9 and shall remain in full force and effect until the 31st day of December, 2000. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT on this day of , 1999. 14 13.20 FOR TI� INTERNATTONAL UIVION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL NO. 49, AFL-CIO / - --- - . . . .. .. . .. . .. .. .. _ _ -.�:_ , ._ --.. ; '. _ ^ Tim . Connors, sine � Representative � �. �%. �� `�� .�� 7 i Da`vid Jensen, Stew rd ,i':% �=�� - - �f -� r. FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY Nancy J. Jorgenson, Mayor William W. Burns, City Manager I hereby recommend approval of this agreement. �� a S. Hill, Human Resources Manager ��. �' �� n G. Flora, Director of Public Works/City Engineer 15 13.21 A.PPENDIX A WAGES 1999 and 2000 Public Services Worker (PS� PSW-A.1 Entry PSW-A.2 After one (1) year of satisfactory performance in PSW-A.1 classification PSW-B.1 After two (2) years of satisfactory performance in PSW-A classification and achievement of minimum qualifications PSW-B.2 After one (1) year of satisfactory performance in PSW-B classification PSW-C After two (2) years of satisfactory performance in PSW-B classification and achievement oF minimum qualifications PSW-D After five (5) years of satisfactory performance and achievement of minimum qualifications Hourly Rate 1999 2000 $12.83 $13.21 $13.74 $14.15 $14.70 $15.14 $15.63. $16.10 $16.58 $17.08 $17.51 $18.04 Advancement to the next step will occur at the next regular pay period following satisfactory completion of the time of service requirement and achievement of minimum qualifications, if pertinent. Mechanic Level A B Person assigned to Lead Mechanic Houriy Rate 1999 2000 $16.58 $17.08 $17.85 $18.39 $18.53 $19.09 Seasonal/Temporary Employees Employees employed by the employer on a seasonal/temporary basis for no more than 125 working days per calendar year either in a full-time (more than 14 hours per week) or part- time capacity will be compensated as determined by the employer for the term of this employment. Such employees will not be e(igibie for any benefits under the Agreement except those which may be required by law. 13.�2 APPENDIX B PUBLIC WORKS 1��IAINTENANCE MII�f�IUM REQUIItEMENTS Public Services Worker Level A Minimum Requirements High School Diploma, GED or equivalent. Valid Minnesota Class B Driver's License. Successful completion of City's physical examination including drug testing, if required. Ability to read, understand, and follow written and ora( instructions, including safety rules. Ability to meet the physical demands of the job including but not limited to lifting, bending, climbing, reaching overhead, pushing and pulling. Ability to perform job responsibilities in c(imatic extremes. Ability to perform routine repair and maintenance tasks in one or more of the following sections: Streets, Parks, Sewer, Water, Vehicle Maintenance. Ability to work cooperatively as a member of a crew or team. 13.�3 Public Services Worker Level B Minimum Requirements Meets or exceeds all the minimum requirements of Public Services Worker L.evel A Completion of two (2) years of experience at Level A Minnesota Class B driver's license or appropriate Commercial Driver's License Successful completion of all applicable City safety and hazardous materials training Safe work practices and safe driving record Adherence to City's policies in regard to tardiness and sick leave Adherence to all other policies and procedures for City employees Ability to deal effectively and tactfully with the public Good knowledae of location of streets and public facilities Working knowledge of fundamental job duties CERTIFICATION: For Streets Workers: Ability to use non-motorized and small engine types of equipment in area of job responsibilities For Parks Workers: Minnesota Non-Commerciai Pesticide/Herbicide Applicator License/Certificate For Sewer Workers: Class S-D Waste Water Operator's Certificate For Water Workers: Class D Water Supply System Operator's Certificate For Mechanic's Helper: Demonstrated ability in the repair of small engines an.d routine vehicle maintenance i�3 13.24 Public Services Worker Level C Minimum Requirements Meets or exceeds all the minimum requirements of Public Services Worker L.evel B Completion of two (2) years of experience at Level B Ability to work with minimum amot►nt of on-site supervision Good knowledge of all operations, preventive maintenance and routine repair of equipment operated in area of job responsibility Enrollment in a Public Works Certificate Program or other program related to public works maintenance offered by a technical coilege or community college with successful completion of one quarter of course work (at least 16 quarter credits) Good knowledge of inethods and materials used in area of job responsibility CERTIFICATION: For Streets Workers: Completion of course work (at least three (3) quarter credits), in- service training, or certifieation in one (1) or more areas including but not limited to the following areas: bituminous technology and repair, light equipment operation, tree trimming, traffic control, asphalt testin�, sign making, pavement marking, snow removal For Parks Workers: In addition to Minnesota Non-Commercial Applicator License/Certificate, successfiil completion of a course at a least 3 quarter credits) or other certification desianated by the City af Local 49 in one (I) or more areas including but not limited to the foll irrigation, entomology, forestry, turf maintenance, building maintenar concrete finishing, and surveying For Sewer Workers: Class S-C Waste Water Operator's Certificate Pesticide/Herbicide technical college (at :er consultation with �wing: landscaping, �e and construction, For Water Workers: Class C Water Supply System Operator's Certificate 19 13.25 Public Services Worker Level D Minimum Requirements Meets or exceeds all the minimum requirements of Public Services Worker Level C Completion of one (1) year of experience at Level C Completion of a Public Works Certificate Program or other program related to public works maintenance offered by a technical college or community college with successful completion of three (3) quarters of course work (at least 48 quarter credits), provided that, during 1990 only, this requirement is waived for employees in the Maintenance II classification on December 31, 1989, upon achievement of ten years of service in the Public Works Maintenance Division of the City For sewer workers a Class S-B Waste Water Operator's Certificate may be substituted for the education requirement. For water workers a Class B Water Supply System Operator's Certificate may be substituted for the education requirement. Ability to work without direct on-site supervision and to make on-site decisions related to task assignments Broad knowledge of operational aspects of public works maintenance department/division CERTIFICATION: For Streets Workers: Successful completion of a certified heavy equipment training program or equivalent training and experience, and completion of course work (at least three (3) quarter credits), in-service training, or certification in two (2) or more areas including but not limited to the following areas: bituminous technology and repair, tree trimming, traffic control, asphalt testing, sign making, pavement marking, snow removal, and basic carpentry. For Parks Workers: In addition to Minnesota Non-Commercial Pesticide/Herbicide Applicator License/Certificate, successful compietion of a course at a technical college (at least 3 quarter credits) or other certification designated by the City after consultation with Local 49 in three (3) or more areas including but not limited to the following: landscaping, irrigation, entomology, forestry, turf maintenance, building maintenance and construction, concrete finishing, and surveying 20 13.26 viechanic Minimum Requirements Level A High school diploma, GED, or equivalent. � Valid Minnesota Class B Driver's License or appropriate Commercial Driver's License. Successful completion of City's physical examination including drug testing, if required. Ability to read, understand, and follow written and oral instructions, including safety rules. Ability to meet the physical demands of the job including but not limited to lifting, bending, climbing, reaching overhead, pushing, and pulling. Course work or experience in diesel mechanics. Experience in electric and Qas welding. Two (2) years of applicable experience in auto and/or diesel maintenance and repair with a variety of light and heavy equipment. One (1) year of technical college course work (51 quarter credits) in auto or diesel mechanics or certification as a Master Automotive Technician by the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence. One additional year of applicable experience can be substituted for up to seventeen (17) quarter credits. Level B Meets or exceeds all the minimum requirements of Level A. Three (3) years of applicable experience in auto and/or dieset maintenance and repair with a variety of light and heavy equipment or one (1) year experience as Mechanic, Level A, with the City of Frid(ey. One (1) year of technical college course work (51 quarter credits) in auto or diesel mechanics or certification as a Master Automotive Technician by the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence. 21 13.27 � � CITY OF FRIDLEY To From: Date: MEMORANDIIM William W. Burns, City Manager �" � Sara S. Hill � � January 20, 1999 Re: Mileage Rate Change - 1999 Sara S. Hill Human Resources Manager (612) 572-3507 The Internal Revenue Service has made the decision to lower the mileage rate from $0.325 per mile to $0.310 per mile for 1999. Therefore, I have attached a resolution to change the City of Fridley's mileage rate in order to avoid potential tax liabilities for our employees. It is my recommendation that we make this adjustment and that you present this resolution to City Council for approval at their January 25, 1999 meeting. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 14.01 Jan-07-99 12:53P Jorgenson James +l 612 571-1648 P.02 0 �'� �� Qrc r"� !J�. j �t� /� �� -�.;. '�° The standard mileaAe rate will be LESS for '99 business driving: � The rate FALLS to 31C aer mile next vear, down from 323�C for '98, '_ due to deciines in gas prices and the coat of cara. First decrease ever. This could mean headaches for employera who reimbuzse employees for business travel. If they pay 32�C per mile next year for '99 driving,"' the employees are taxed on the 13�C excess, and payroll taxes also are due. Tax pros fear that if firma don't timelq deposit the taxes� IRS will treat the full 323�C as income subject to payroll taxes and impose big penalties. So employers have asked the IRS to delay the decrease foz a few months. There could be another drov in 'OQ if IRS decides to substitute the cost of personal auto insurance for buaiaess coverage in its formula. Some other voints to bear in mind about the mileaRe allowance: Folks can deduct the cost of parking and tolls on top of the 31C. Leased autos driven for business are elit�ible for the 31C rate. Once the standard rate is used, it must be uaed for the rest of the lease. MileB,ae zate users must reduce the income taa basie of their �carc by the depreciation portion of the allowance. Reduction is 12C per mile.. And the standard mileage rate cannot be used for two or more autos used alternatively for business...can trap those who own several vehicles. Drivint� for charitable or�tanizations remaina 14C for volunteezs. For medical travel and emplovee movintt expenses...lOC. No change. Our final year-end tips� to ease the pain that April couid bring. On deductible items �aid by checka at 4ear end and mailed in '98: Deduction can be claimed on your '98 return, even if checks arrive in Jan. Bills paid by televhone or at vour bank on Dec. 31 are deductible in the year your account is debited...in '99.if on the next buainess day. On deductible items�that you charRe late in vear, note the rules: If you use a bank credit card for contributions, medical expenses, subscriptions, etc...deductible ia '98, even though charge is paid in '99. If you use a store charAe, deducted in the year that bill is paid. �+� ,. ,:_... , ir IRAa and co� To lock in the four-vear apzead for '48 conversiona to Roth IRAs, payouts must occur by Dec. 31. but you have 60 days to finiah the awitch. Other IRAs can be set up as late as Avril 15 for '98 deductions. Payins also must be made bq then...filing for an extenaioa has no effect. Ditto for SEP-IRAs...regular SEPs. Set up in '99� deduct for '98. Other company plans must exist before �99 to get '98 deductions� even if the first contribution to plan ie not made until eome time in '99. Applies to self-emvloveds too...must aet up Reoghs prior to '94. Those who miss the Dec. 31 deadl.ine for Reogha atill can establish a SEP. And as another qear comes to an end� the 73rd for the Tax Letter, we wish you a happy and healthy holiday seaaon that leavea you refreshed for the new year and ready to cope with the tax tasks that lie ahead. We'll be here to help you...you can count on that. YouFs verq truly, 1 'r(.G Dec. 23, 1998 THE KI LINGE ASHINGTON EDITORS Copyripht 1998. The Kiplinqer Washinpton Editors, lnc. �uotadon tor political or commerciat use Is not permk�ed. DupNcatiny an entlre Issue tar sharinp with others, by any means, is illeqal��c�f individual ftems for Ir�emai use is permiUed tor reqlsUants with the CopyAght Clearance Cetrter, 222 Rosewood Orive, n r�, 923. For details, call 978-750-8400 or visit www.copyrighlcom. � � � RESOLUTION NO. -1998 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CHANGE IN MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT RATES FOR THE 1999 CALENDAR YEAR WHEREAS, there has been a decline in gas prices over the past years and the cost of cars has remained stable; and WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has reduced the standard mileage rate to $.031 cents per mile for 1999; and WHEREAS, an adjustment of the standard mileage rate for the City of Fridley is warranted; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley that the following change be authorized for employees of the City of Fridley, effective January 1, 1999: 1. Standard Mileage Rate reduced to $0.31 per mile. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1998. DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK 14.03 NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR TO: FROM: � � ClTY OF FRIDLEY MEMORANDUM WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER nf �� William A. Champa Management Assistant WILLIAM A. CHAMPA, MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT (612) 572-3502 SUBJECT: YEAR 2000 (Y2K) READINESS PLAN AND APPOINTMENT OF A Y2K PROJECT COORDINATOR DATE: JANUARY 20, 1999 A team of City staff inembers has been assembled to address our Y2K awareness and readiness in anticipation of the upcoming millennium. This team is reviewing both internal and external issues that impact the City and will be prepared to discuss our progress at the Council Conference meeting on February 1, 1999. The League of Minnesota Cities recommends that we appoint by resolution a Y2K Project Coordinator. This individual will be responsible for the overall coordination of the City's awareness and readiness efforts and will ensure that appropriate timetables are adhered to. All Y2K inquires will be addressed to this individual. In the attached resolution we have designated Bill Burns as our Y2K Project Coordinator. 15.01 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPOINTING A YEAR 2000 PROJECT COORDINATOR WHEREAS, the City of Fridley recognizes that the Year 2000 problem involves more than just a computer; and WHEREAS, the City recognizes that all of its departments and services may be impacted by the Year 2000 problem; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted a policy establishing the Year 2000 problem as a top priority for all City operations; and WHEREAS, in this policy the City sets forth its commitment to identify, address and resolve potential problems created by Year 2000 issues and to make its best effort to ensure continuity of essential City services; and WHEREAS, the City's efforts to minimize the potential impact of the Year 2000 problem will likely involve multiple City operations and outside organizations; and WHEREAS, the City believes that coordination of all persons working on the Year 2000 problem on behalf of the City is essential to the efficiency and effectiveness of the City's overall Year 2000 effort; and WHEREAS, the City pledges to create contingency plans responsive to interruption of essential City services that result from Year 2000 computer failures, Whereas the League of Minnesota Cities has requested that cities designate a contact person to receive information on the Year 2000 problem; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley hereby appoints William W. Burns, City Manager, to serve as the City's Year 2000 Project Coordinator. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF JANUARY, 1999. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 15.02 � William W. Burns � M E M O R A N D l� M City Manager CITY OF FRIDLEY TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: William W. Burns, City Manager �� DATE: January 21, 1999 SUBJECT: Contract with Prosecuting Attorney Attached is an agreement between the City of Fridley and Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered, and Carl J. Newquist for the services of City Prosecutor. The only change in the agreement was an increase in the hourly rate from $75.00 to $80.00. The contract will be in effect for a period of three (3) years. Based upon a survey of other communities and upon the quality of work being done by Mr. Newquist's office, I recommend your approval of the proposed legal services agreement. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. /rsc Attachment 16.01 AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND NEWQUIST & EKSTRUM. CHARTERED AND CARL J. NEWQUIST l. City Prosecutor A�pointment: Carl J. Newquist and his law office, Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered, 6401 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, 55432, are appointed City Prosecutor for the City of Fridley. 2. Term of Agreement: Thirty-six (36) months from and after January 1, 1999, to terminate on December 31, 2001, unless otherwise extended by mutual agreement of the parties hereta 3. Duties and Resnonsibilities of the City Prosecutor: A. Proximity being an essence hereof, the City Prosecutor shall maintain an office in the City of Fridley. B. Represent the City in all criminal proceedings and cases wherein the City is a party, has jurisdiction, and/or has an identifiable interest therein, except those cases arising under the City's zoning, housing, rental housing and building codes. C. Prepare files for court, including assembling witness lists, preparing subpoenas, copying statutes or ordinances for court trials, etc. Request certified documents, such as driver's records, motor vehicle records, prior convictions, orders for protection, bank records, ordinances, and other information required for court. D. Prepare letters and notices associated with various court trials. These include letters to victims, omnibus hearing notifications, and notices of change in time, date or place of hearings. E. Maintain records, including the court calendar, records of formal complaint requests, records regarding the criminal history requests from the BCA, records of officer vacation schedules, and court assignment schedules of the prosecutor. F. Telephone conferences and maintaining correspondence with vaxious agencies including law enforcement agencies, courts, Minnesota correctional facilities, victim/witnesses, defendants/defense attorneys, social workers, psychiatrists, victim advocate representatives, hospitals, banks, insurance companies, etc. Research statutes and/or ordinances for court cases, formal complaints, or as requested by the Fridley Police Department or the City of Fridley. 16.02 � 5 G. H. I. Handling requests for disposition of detainer. 1Vlaintaining active files. Advise Council, City staff, and the Police Department of legal questions and issues that relate to official City business. J. Advise and attend educational and training programs for City staff and the Police Department as requested by the City Manager and/or the Director of Public Safety. I� L. M Advise and attend such Council meetings and meetings of City commissions and committees as the City Manager and/or Mayor may direct. Prepare activity reports, billing information, and reports on status of City litigation as the City Manager may direct. Defend City employees, when applicable, in suits and claims arising from the performance of official duties as the City Manager may direct. Conflict of Interest: The City Prosecutor shall not represent any individual or party in any civil or criminal matter against the City of Fridley. Compensation• A. The City Prosecutor shall be compensated as the following rates: 1999: $80.00/hour 2000: $80.00/hour 2001: $80.00/hour Law Clerk: $35.00/hour Law Clerk: $35.00/hour Law Clerk: $35.00/hour B. The City Prosecutor shall be reimbursed for all expense advances made by him on behalf of the City such as fees and costs for court transcripts and filing. All other expenses and costs of overhead such as dues, subscriptions, licenses, insurance, secretarial services, etc., associated with the performance of legal services shall be the responsibility of the City Prosecutor. 6. Assignment of Services and Agreement: The City Prosecutor shall not assign any interest or obligation of this agreement without the prior written consent of the City. 2 16.03 7. Affirmative Action: Because the City requires and follows a policy of Affirmative Action and will not tolerate discriminatory acts, the City Prosecutor shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of age, sex, religious beliefs, political affiliations, or other protected classifications under federal, state, or local laws or regulations. 8. Work Product: All ordinances, resolutions, correspondence, and other documents or materials drafted for the City by the City Prosecutor shall, upon their completion, become the property of the City. 9. Insurance: The City Prosecutor agrees to maintain a valid policy of Professional Liability Insurance for the duration of this agreement. The value of the policy shall not be less than Five Hundred Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($500,000). 10. Severabilitv: The City or City Prosecutor may sever the terms of this contract upon si�y (60) days' written notice. Failure by the City or the City Prosecutor to comply with any of the terms of this contract shall be grounds for terminating this agreement, as shall be the City's dissatisfaction with the City Prosecutor's performance under the agreement. Upon termination of this contract, the City shall only be responsible for the monthly fee and any additional billings accrued as of the date of termination. Agreed and entered into this day of January, 1999. Carl J. Newquist NEWQUIST & EKSTRUM, CHARTERED : Carl J. Newquist Its CITY OF FRIDLEY : : Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayor William W. Burns City Manager 3 16.04 � L QTY OF FRIDLEY CLAIMS JANUARY 25, 1999 CLAIMS 84919 - 85257 � � CRY OF FRIDLEY LICENSES JAN UARY 25, 1999 � � QTY OF FRIDLEY LICENSES GENERAL CONTRACTOR-COMMERCIAL Bainey Group 2800 Campus Dr #30 Plymouth MN 55441 � Tom Olson Mikkelson-Wulff Construction Inc 126 Blake Rd N Hopkins MN 55343 Bruce Wulff GENERAL CONTRACTOR-RESIDENTIAL Mat-Con 9783 4 St NE Hanover MN 55341 Steven Matson HEATING Fisher-Bjork Sheetmetal Company Inc PO Box 40009 St Paul MN 55104 Charles Fisher PLUMBING Olson Plumbing 931 44 Ave NE Columbia Heights MN 55421 Stull I.ee Plumbing 15532 Nowthen Blvd Ramsey MN 55303 Doug Olson Lee Stull RON NLKOWSKI Building Official Same STATE OF MINN RON JULKOWSKI Building Official STATE OF MINN Same � � CXTY OF FRIDLEY ESTIMATES JANUARY 25, 1999 MEMORANDUM PLAl�TNING DIVISION Date: 1 /21 /99 To: William Bums, City Manager !�� From:Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Follow up action on VAR #98-34 (Spikers Grille Sign) M-99-17 �I��IIil��li� The City of Fridley has been asked, by Spikers Grille & Beachclub, to grant variances increasing the maximum height of a sign to 50', the maximum size to 200 square feet, and to place a free standing sign approximately 3' from an entry driveway rather than the 10' required by code. CITY COUNCIL ACTION At the January 4, 1999 City Council meeting, the City Council tabled action on the request and extended the 60 day date for action. Council instructed staff to re-examine the site and meet with the sign contractor� to demonstrate signs of varying heights and sizes. . __ ; Planning Staff met with the petitioner on January 9�' and January 13"' to re-examine the site. On January 13�', staff met with Mr. Pelstring and Mr. Pascual at 7:30 AM in the Spikers parking lot. A local sign contractor brought in a"boom° truck so that staff could examine different heights for the proposed sign. The boom was placed adjacent to the drive, as requested by the variance. The petitioner did not provide mock-ups of various sized signs, as desired by staff. Rather than view mock signs, the petitioner had the sign erector stand in the boom and hold a 15' long stick with a rag tied at each end. The boom was then raised to 25' and staff then drove past the site heading south and then north on HWY 65. The field exercise confirmed that an 80 square foot sign, � ti22isa 21.01 Memorandum 25' in height is adequately in view for persons traveling along HWY 65. At times the boom would blend in with all of the mechanical on Spiker's roof, but overall the sign was highly visible. The pictures taken by staff do not accurately depict how clearly the 25' boom could be viewed. Please keep in mind these pictures were taken at 7:30 - 8:00 AM, all facing towards the East, when lighting was far from ideal. The boom was then raised to 37.5 feet and the picture taking process was repeated. The increase in height did not improve the view of the sign from the south. As one heads North on HWY 65, you are not able to see either the 25' or 37' sign until you get past Kurt Manufacturing. The 37.5' height was more visible than the 25' from the North, only because the boom was then higher than the roof top mechanical and did not blend in as much as it did at 25'. STAFF ANALYSIS The field exercise confirmed that an 80 square foot sign, 25' in height is adequately in view for persons t�aveling along HWY 65. The location next to the driveway appeared to be the optimal on-site location for a sign of this size. Staff believes that a rooftop sign would still be the preferred type of signage for this site. The code does allow a roof sign to replace the use of a free standing sign. The roof top mechanical is seen from great distances. A roof top sign would screen this mechanical while giving the petitioner a high visibility sign. If a free standing sign is still desired, staff recommends approval of only the variance for a reduced setback of 3' from the driveway, and that a stipulation be added requiring screening of the roof top mechanical to be completed by June 1, 1999. Staff believes the petitioner does not meet the criteria, required by the sign code, to be granted variances for the size or height of the sign. The attached pictures, while poor in quality due to lighting, illustrate the visibility of the differing height signs and of the roof top mechanical. The following is a summary of the criteria required for a variance, and why staff does not recommend granting the size and height variances. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property. The circumstances surrounding the location of this property are neither exceptional or extraordinary. City staff recently identified 16 other local businesses located in similar settings, setback by frontage roads, who have legal conforming signs. Sam's Club is one example of a business separated from an arterial by other businesses and a frontage road. Sam's Club signage is in conformance with City code. Preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right. The petitioner is not denied a property right by the City code. The sign ordinance is consistent across the City. The petitioner is allowed a sign the 12/22/98 21.02 Memorandum same size and height, per code, as all other business in the City of Fridley. The petitioner also has the option of using a roof top sign if the petitioner does not wish to follow the code requirements for free standing signs. Unnecessary hardship. The City code is not imposing unnecessary hardship on the petitioner. The field work completed by staff cleariy shows that a sign built to the City's size and height requirements provides adequate visibility to the signage. The petitioners location and desire to have a larger sign is not considered hardship. Not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare. The proposed pylon sign would detrimentally distract or dominate the landscape due to� it's extreme height (50') and size (200' sq.). Approval of the height and size requests would set a precedents for all future signs proposed along HWY 65 and HWY 47. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff still recommends denial of all the requests made by VAR #98-34, except for the location of the sign near the driveway. Attachments 12/22/98 21.03 4 i '- yr ` 21.04 � � °:� � � ¢ _ � �#-ar� � = a �r � � - � ,�� .a = � � r- � Y � f�� :i �. � � � � - - � _��:. ._ � _ � `" �".�: � ��,�� '�;..4,. " `'"9. � ��_. , r � �''�°'� ,,� � ��.,,.> -� � ...-:.A r'• " J . r�� .s p,�a a ✓:.,. ;� i 21.05 � �. :: u� � ��.. ----� ��: � � .} � � v=� K ,�� i� . � �� L� � _�- - �� i , � w =� �-- � =� � �� _ :� _ A � t �� :, �_4 . _ - � t .= - �� Y� � "" " s �; <E. "ty _ � . � - R � �! ' 5 i 1Cef � v Y 7 N 21.06 '� � � 21.07 • � N 21.08 � � N 21.09 � � N 21.10 � � M AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND E. T. C. 33 - FRIDLEY COMMUNICATIONS WORRSHOP This agreement made and entered into this day of , 1999, by and between the City of Fridley, a Minnesota municipal corporation, in the County of Anoka, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "the City" and E.T.C. Fridley Communications Workshop, Incorporated, hereinafter referred to as "ETC," a non-profit organization in the County of Anoka, State of Minnesota. For and in consideration of the promises, covenants, terms and provisions herein contained, the parties mutually agree as follows: 1. Period of Agreement: This agreement for a -month period shall be effective through , unless otherwise terminated by either party with a ninety-day written notice. Upon termination of the agreement, all uncommitted amounts shall be determined and agreed upon by the City Manager and E.T.C. 2. Responsibilities of ETC Fridlev Communications Workshop, Inc.: ETC agrees to provide, on behalf of the City, services to Fridley residents as follows: a. To educate members of the public to the potential uses of video communications in the community. b. To provide training and technical assistance that will promote citizen use of available cablecasting facilities as a non-commercial means of communication. c. To serve as a resource center for information, materials, and equipment relating to the use of video as a communications medium. d. To serve as a receiving, holding and disbursing entity for moneys intended to promote non- commercial citizens' use of the channel. e. To provide at the request of the City, assistance to City staff in the programming of its government access channel, at no additional cost. 3. ETC further agrees to keep and maintain a qualified staff of personnel, both paid and volunteer, necessary to perform ttre services herein set forth. 4. For the period of this agreement, the City will grant to ETC the amount of $43,554 from the cable franchise fee from the cunent cable supplier to the City. Quarterly amounts shall be payable upon receipt by the City of the quarterly franchise fee payment from the supplier. ETC shall keep accurate and complete records of financial transactions and shall provide to th�e City, on a quarterly basis (April 1, 1999; July 1, 1999; October l, 1999; and February 1, 2000) a complete written fnancial report of its operations during the period of this agreement. Said records shall include an accounting system maintained in a generally accepted manner, inc(uding, if applicable, the filing of proper tax returns to the Federal and State governments, such as payroll tax returns and corporate income ta�c returns. Said records shall be available for inspection by the City Manager, members of the City Council, and Cable Commission members during regular business hours. 22.01 6. ETC shall provide to the City a written report of its operational activities, including whatever data will assist the City in evaluating the effectiveness of ETC in the provision of the services herein set forth. Said report will be provided to the City within sixty (60) days after the completion of this agreement. ETC will provide interim reports of its operational activities on April 1, 1999; July 1, 1999; October 1, 1999; and February l, 2000. 7. ETC shall indemnify, save and hold harmless the City, and all of its officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims for losses, injuries, damages, and liabilities to persons or property occasioned wholly or in part by the acts or omissions of ETC, its agents, officers, employees, members, guest patrons, or any person or persons associated with ETC for any purpose. 8. Insurance: ETC will provide proof of liability insurance, naming the City as an additional insured, in an amount and form as approved by the City Manager. 9. ETC shall provide the City documentation that it has obtained non-profit, ta�c-exempt status from the Federal Internal Revenue Service and the State of Minnesota Department of Revenue. 10. It is understood and agreed that no alteration or variation of the terms of this agreement shal( be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto. . 11. In the event of a breach by ETC of the terms or conditions of this agreement, the City shall have, in addition to any other legal recourse, the right to terminate this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused the agreement to be executed by their proper officers, thereunto duly authorized. Nancy J. Jorgenson, Mayor William W. Burns, City Manager Becky Harvet, ETC Chairperson Richard A. Klatte, Treasurer ZZz�2 MEMOI�:ANDUM PLArTNING DIVISION Date: 1 /14/99 �,/ �10 To: William Bums, City Manager �r From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Appeals Commission action on VAR #98-31 M-99-13 INTRODUCTION The City of Fridley has been asked by Mark Smith, Money Xchange, to grant a number of variances to Lot 9, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands, generally located at 6301 HWY 65. The variances would accommodate the development of a"street bank". APPEALS COMMISSION ACTION At the January 13, 1999, Appeals Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for VAR #98-31. The Appeals Commission unanimously recommended denial of all variances requested. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the recommendation of the Appeals Commission and deny VAR #98-31. Attachments 23.01 City of Fridley Land Use Application VAR-98-31 January 13, 1999 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Mark Smith - Money Xchange 13969 Grand Ave. Burnsville, MN 55337 Requested Action: Variance Purpose: Requesting variances necessary to open a"street bank", a check cashing operation doing business as the Money Xchange. Existing Zoning: C-2, General Business Location: 6301 HWY 65 Size: 13,140 square feet .30 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant gas/service station Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Office & C-2 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Municipal Liquor & P W: HWY 65 & C-3 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: The current proposal is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (ref. 1-3,2.A.) Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Sec. 205.14.03.(A) requires a minimum lot area of 20,000 sq. ft.; Sec.205.14.03.C.(2).(a) requires a minimum side yard setback of 15 feet; Sec. 205.14.OS.D.(5).(b) requires a hard surface to be setback a minimum of 5 feet from a side lot line; and; Sec. 205.14.OS.D.(5).(a) requires a hard surface area to be setback 20 from the street ROW. Zoning History: Zoned C-2, platted in 1954. Service Station built in 1956 Legal Description of Property: Lot 9, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands Council Action: January 25, 1999 Public Utilities: Available, water has been shut off. Transportation: 63`d Street and the HWY 65 Service Dr. Physical Characteristics: Small site does not independently meet Code standards, lot needs landscape improvements, building needs exterior work. SUMMARY OF PROJECT The Money Xchange is seeking variances to decrease the minimum lot size of 12,991 square feet; to decrease the minimum side yard setback from 15' to 0'; to decrease the minimum setback for a hard surface area from the side lot line from 5' to 0'; and to decrease the minimum setback for a hard surface area from the street ROW from 20' to 1.5' to allow the development of a "street bank". SUMMARY OF HARDSHIP ( letter attached) APPEALS RECOMMENDATION Appeals Commission recommended denial of all variances requested. STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends denial of this package of variances due to the �treme deficit in lot size, which creates the need for numerous other variances that run contrary to the City's wishes to create well planned environments. No similar variances have been granted. Staff Report Prepared by: Scott Hickok 23.02 . � •; HARDSHIP STATEMENT See attached statement from petitioner. HISTORY Lot 9 is the service station site. Lot 10 is the White Wolf Site. Lot 11 is the vacant site north of White Wolf. (For history from 1954 to 1998, see Exhibit A) In 1998, White Wolf moved from this site. Once White Wolf moved out, the owner of Lots 9, 10, and 11 (Jon Peterson) approached City Staff for their input on the future of these lots. Staff discussed zoning, future development, and their interest in having the owner combine the lots and sell them for future development as a package. As a combined parcel, the land area would support a substantial development and further the City's interest in developing a strong image along its corridors. Whatever developed, staff indicated that the condition of the building, position of building, and blight caused by the existing service station made it the City's desire to have that building removed. The owner then kept communications open, called with several interested parties and appeared to share staff's interests, and to market the site carefully. Some time prior to May of 1998, the owner contacted staff to indicate that he had an interested party who would require a special use permit, but would be interested in purchasing all three lots (the entire former White Wolf site, both buildings). The proposal was to consolidate the three lots as a used car lot. The proposed would rework the exterior of the main White Wolf building, completely rework the parking lot, provide new landscape and screening along the east property line, provide new lighting, and remove the former White Wolf storage building from the site. Though enthusiastic about the removal of the southem building, new landscape, building clean-up etc., staff expressed concern about the use and its compatibility with the neighborhood behind. The zoning on the property does state that by special use permit an agency selling or displaying new or used vehicles is permi�ted by special use permit. � Staff informed the owner that a special use permit for auto sales would likely not have the support of staff and that he should count on a staff recommendation of denial on that special use permit request. Ultimately, the Council has the authority to decide, so 23.03 even though staff may recommend denial, the process is not complete until the Commission reviews and recommends and the Council approves or denies the request. Knowing staff's position, Mr. Gary Erickson proceeded with his request for a special use permit for an agency selling automobiles. Mr. Erickson's petition was received on May 29, 1998. The petition for the used car special use permit was scheduled for the Planning Commission's agenda on June 17,1998. Two days before the review of the automobile sales special use permit by the Planning Commission, Mr. Peterson, owner of the properties, announced that he had made a deal to sell the northern lots, Lots 10 and 11, and the building to Gary Wruck for a restoration construction office. Mr. Erickson was then forced to revoke his special use permit request. In August 1998, staff received a petition from the Money X Change, Mark Austin Smith The request was incomplete. A larger series of variances would be required than requested. The original request could be described simply as a request for a variance to allow Lot 9, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands, to function as a site for the Money X Change, "Street Bank", primarily a check cashing facility. Staff evaluated the request and informed the petitioner of the numerous variances involved. The petitioner held their request and requested action for several months as they had an architect study the elimination of as many of the variances as possible. On December 18, 1998, the application was submitted. The number of variances requested for the project had been reduced, but still numerous variances remained. The suggestion that all variances could be eliminated, except lot size did not come to fr�ition. The application was scheduled for staff analysis and Commission and Council review. ANALYSIS All the other variances are predicated on a lot that is too small and a building that originally depended on its neighboring lot to make its own setbacks work. If the City grants a variance to lot size when there is no hardship to justify the variance, the City has essentially reduced the minimum size standard for all C-2 parcels. Beyond parcel size, the substantial investment in remodeling this building triggers the inclusion of all current standards related to building setbacks, site development, and the building Code. The petitioner has indicated that the shell of the building was constructed in an extremely solid fashion and therefore they believe that the remodeling planned would justify reusing the exterior shell. 23.04 The City Fire Marshal and Building Official have been inside the facility. There is very little inside this building's shell that is salvageable. A reuse of this building will mean that except for the concrete shell, the building will be totally reconstructed. Therefore, the value of the building is minimal. The investment in the building will far exceed its standing value. Any pre-existing status is now gone and this project is viewed as new construction. Outside of lot area, all variances most likely could have been eliminated, if the petitioner was building a new building as opposed to reusing the shell. Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Sec. 205.14.03.(A) requires a minimum lot area of 20,000 sq. ft. The Money X Change is seeking variances to decrease the minimum lot size to 12,991 square feet. Sec.205.14.03.C.(2).(a) requires a minimum side yard setback of 15 feet. The Money X Change is seeking to decrease the minimum side yard setback from 15 feet to 0 feet. Sec. 205.14.05.D.(5).(b) requires a hard surface to be setback a minimum of 5 feet from a side lot line. The Money X Change is seeking to The Money X Change is seeking to reduce this setback from 5 feet to 0 feet. Sec. 205.14.05.D.(5).(a) requires a hard surface area to be set back 20 from the street ROW. The Money X Change is seeking to decrease the minimum setback for a hard surface area from the street ROW from 20 feet to 1.5 feet . A variance not requested by the petitioner, but also required, was revealed upon further staff analysis. That variance applies to Code Section 205.14.03.C.(1), regarding front yard setbacks. The arbor proposed for the area in front of the building has the impact of a roofed structure and, as such, is subject to the 35' building setback. An overhang or canopy can project into the front yard, provided it does not project into the setback more than 2'. A 1' variance would be required of the City or the Petitioner would be required to eliminate 1 foot of the arbor. 23.05 (Blvd. al� (Site as viewed from 63'°, looking North) Photographs have been provided to illustrate the current conditions for the Commission and City Council. The photographs help to illustrate the building and specifically the setback along 63rd Avenue NE. A boulevard not only helps to create a landscaped area for image; It also allows area for snow storage. Reducing the setback between the south parking stalls and 63�d Avenue NE will result in having to store snow elsewhere on site. The petitioner has also asked to eliminate the setback to the north. No landscape or snow storage can occur in that area. A new driveway onto the Highway 65 service drive and a diminished front setback will mean that the only remaining place to store snow on site is along the east property line. The east property line is also one of the two small areas proposed for landscape materials. The combination of limited area for snow, the potential for tons of snow to be stored, and the salt damage anticipated from snow will likely create unhealthy plant material and diminish any landscape value on the small planting islands that would remain on the site. Beyond the storage of snow, trucking snow off the site, each time it snows would have a noise impact on the adjacent residential parcels. 23.06 Other concerns listed by City Staff include: 1. The wall adjacent to the north property line would be required to be a rated fire wall. Its canopy must not cross the property line. 2. The curbing on the north property line would be tipped over by large vehicles or snow plowing activities. A curb without earth backing is not only unconventional, but impractical. A curb relocation plan must be approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. The architect for this project has provided simple, somewhat sketchy plans and a full code review is typical to show you could meet the requirements of Code, one should be submitted with application. 4. There were fuel tanks in the ground. There has been no discussion of the disposition of these as the redevelopment of this site has been considered. The petitioner typically certifies that all tanks have been removed and all necessary site clean-up has been done related to in-ground tanks on site. 5. The building would be required to be brought up to current ADA Codes due to the change in occupancy. 6. Lighting would be an essential element for security. There has been no discussion or plans submitted that address this issue. 7. Limited area for image enhancing landscape. Staff does not believe the series of variances can be supported by the hardship stated by the petitioner. RECOMMENDATIONS City Staff recommends denial of this package of variances due to the extreme deficit in lot size, which creates the need for numerous other variances that run contrary to the City's wishes to create well planned, well landscaped environments, and environments for safe snow storage. If the Commission elects to recommend approval, staff recommends the following stipulations: 1. The wall adjacent to the north property line shall be a 1 hour rated fire wall. 2. The curbing on the north property line shall be moved as far away from the front property line as possible without interfering with the circulation through the proposed drive-through aisle. Curb relocation plan to be approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. The architect for this project shall provide a full code review to be submitted with application. 4. The petitioner shall provide a snow management plan to be approved by the City prior to issuance of the building permit. 5. The petitioner shall have certified that all tanks have been removed and all necessary site clean-up has been done related to in-ground tanks on site. 6. The building shall be brought up to current ADA Codes due to the change in occupancy. These changes shall apply to both the building and the site. 23.07 _ -� 7. A variance shall be obtained or a 1 foot reduction in the Arbor plans be made prior to issuance of a building permit. APPEALS COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Appeals Commission recommended denial of all requested variances by a unanimous vote. 23.08 EXHIBIT A- History of Lots 9, 10, and 11 from 1954 -1998 In July of 1954, the City approved the Moore Lake Highlands, 3'� Addition plat. The parcels in the plat were arranged in a manner that matched the residential neighborhood to the east. Lot sizes along Highway 65 were no larger than the residential lots along Dellwood Drive. The zoning of the time did not require a minimum lot size for commercial properties. The City did, however, require buildings to be built entirely on the owner's property. On January 14, 1956, the City of Fridley was asked to issue a building permit to Richard W. Steiner. A peculiar element of Mr. Steiner's building permit request was that the Builder indicated that he would be utilizing the South 10' of Lot 10 for his development. The south 10' was never combined for setback purposes, and the current site plan appears to indicate that the north corner on the building may have an overhang that projects over the north property line. Lots 9, 10, and 11 have functioned as joint development since 1956. In 1958 and through the early 1960s, Lots 9 and 10 were zoned C-1 and Lot 11 was zoned R-2, Limited Family Dwelling. In 1968, Lot 11 was rezoned to CR-1, Clinic and Allied Laboratories Disfrict. In 1979, Lots 9,10, and 11 were rezoned to C-2, General Business Area, for the Lift Ski Shop. In the late 70s, an application for a special use permit was also received to allow a garden center on Lot 9. In 1984, Scott Holmer applied for a special use permit for outdoor boat yard and patio furniture display. On October 5, 1984, the City Council approved the special use permit. A combination of parcels form is on file with the special use permit file. This indicates that at that time the City sought a combination of the parcels, the owner did not sign. In 1988, White Wolf began its operation. Ten years later the operation ceased doing business at this location. Most recently, White Wolf utilized this site along with lots 10 and 11 for storage, binding mounting, and repairs. In 1998, White Wolf ceased their operations at this site. 23.09 COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES IN RESPONSE TO THIS REQUEST 1 am opposed to the variances being granted af 6301 Highway 65. Our neighborhood does not want to see fhat use located there. Eugene Ouellette 6343 Dellwood Dr. I am against fhe use with all the traffic that will be coming to a use with such a small !ot area. Laura Ficocello 6329 Dellwood Dr. 1 am opposed to the variances. This becomes part of the picture as you travel along Highway 65. We talk about enhancing Fridley's image, granfing these variances would not do that. Bill and Mildred Hauan 6301 Dellwood Dr. I am opposed to the site being utilized in this manner. It is not the kind of use that we would like to see next to our neighborhood. Frank Eariey We are very much against this use. We do not want this use in this location. Ruby Dalzen (Terry and Mary) 6308 Dellwood Dr. I am opposed to the use. 1 already have issues with people on my property. 1 do not want to have the people from this facility in the neighborhood. The gentleman proposing fhe car sa/es operation came through the neighborhood, asked about our concerns and worked with the neighborhood. l am sorry fhat that proposal did not work. Jon Dahl 1065 63'd Avenue NE We have lived here for 40 years and we are not in favor of this use at all. We would prefer to see a vacant building rafher than this proposed use. Richard and Betty Patterson 6328 Dellwood Drive 23.10 COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES IN RESPONSE TO THIS REQUEST (cont.) � 1 will be unable to make the meeting next Wednesday, but 1 would like the Commission to know fhat 1 am very concemed abouf this proposal. / am a Chaplain at the Hennepin County medical center, I see victims of muggers who have been beaten or stabbed outside of these facilities. Combine this with a nearby liquor store, 1 am very concerned. There are open spaces in the shopping center south of this proposed site. Rafher than granting variances, they could at least consider an exisfing site that would not require the drasfic number of variances to make their project work. Jim Vogt 6315 Dellwood Dr. 23.11 p � Ff �� z,' { $ , �, . �ai„ - W 1 3�g��i5� �• i�. � � _ �ki e 3� I _ r ._. r : � "?*` r---�__ i �/� � � . _ t� .. ;. . � � . . ' � Y� ` ... �, . .� t�•�\ � � � ti � tl �� . , ��•,,� `� � 'i . .,1 ;� I . � ` ' � • t . � 'I� ..i . . :. 'I i ( .4 1 � �' � , . {L._�_._�'_�__\' , ��% � � �` t. e !g p , 1 i ,� � � - --�- W I 4� 1� ��` �•� �� ' b� I W � ,a� T�� ?� ' �_ T } �'r, � �� 3� s i � I i �._. , ° - I O, ` -�-► - ,, , a` M1 . . . ,�...� i.� ` ' ' �,., � , � � i � � I� ' —� � .,� � � _ �. � �-: { � , � �d i i � r '_�' - � � �- ��k . t ,� � 4i, 1 � i ; � i � \ ., � ;, �� `' �: � � � -- ---- �- � ° i � � !; � { ;� :�" F � �, , � � , � , �, , -- --- - ��, t 1,n _ ' i - `- - - - - ; la �� , .. I . . -- �.. � e • � r i , : , .. . . _. . ., ' - ' �,. �,?, � ;,, -._-_ _ _. `O N- ; c � � i I'{ tt ; `�,-,_— o.,K-.. - y _ . . j�+� �. _ � .. 1- �. iU> .._.. .. . 1 . • I l _Vo.. I — jr r • ,� �I� }ti -- :,.�;. _ � . � ., a 1 W�.,f 4' � _ : ; - °� . _ .t � W i q�. ��-� , � . fi�► �. . � - � (ti Ji� T�.�d i . ,. �� J �1 ,�_ � � J � 4�. J � �r,�. � �.� � �,� Fj a�� Atti � r- a � 9- � .i��ri �.�►�.r ��:�w,.+r�...��a � F r ti .I' --- ' i `' �, u_ ,i",� j � � J • -- - -- I : a.:._ „ t -. - _.., , - .', �' �; � � � l i� �' 4� �`( ! I r�_.._ ��5 � � t � � � Y .1�_�I'.. y( ,` . i��' �. i",a .. . _ , i l. ��I,'.._.. I"I ` '� - �� i �c .� �' f� . \, � ` j� I. �.� P �- �,;�� ' �_ � �' � � � -- �� a r � � �E � � � �{ � .p :e 23.13 z� �1 a? � � � O O N � � � k _ I � j �� r �3P1 }� � A �� ' rj n ` N �8t� �r- T �;a '�� W *�,_� � N � 'Y � � ^ � � A �j � :� � , i �,�;�� ,. �� O J '� � e� FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, INC. Casino '�'loneyCenters, Inc. January 4, 1999 Mr. Scott Hickok VIA FACSIMILE Planning Coordinator 612/571-1287 City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN ��432 RE: Statement of Hardship for MoneyXchange at 6431 University Avenue Dear Scott: Our hardship for being granted a variance is based on the following facts: 1. The lot size is less than 20,000 square feet. We cannot make the lot larger or move the building. Our plan creates office in the existing structure converting one of the service bays into office with glass front and the other service bay would be a drive-thru teller. I �vould consider shrinking the building to accommodate the small lot by demolishing the farthest service bay and keeping our teller window in the same place. The hardship for the small lot is that a retail use drives more traffic compared to our street bank office. Z. The building does not comply with the setbacks. We cannot move the building and our hardship here is based on this building existing before the new code. 3. The parking from the side property line is also due to the small lot. Our hardship is the location of the building near the North side property line. We have to work around the building with the need to curb the entire property separating the two pieces. 4. The parking right of way setback is also a function of the lot size. We are complying with the cunent :,ode for parking a.-�� as such cannot comply with Lhe right of �vay,setback. All of our hardship arguments are based on the smaller lot size and working axound the site with attention to parking requirements. I firmly believe that this plan of taking a preexisting gas station and converting it into a street bank is the highest and best use for the property. Furthermore, when weighing what variances we need with the items such as parking and traffic flow around the site, our project is as good as the site can produce. Since v, , 1��t Mar . CEO MAS/cam 3459 WASHINGTON DRIVE SUTTE 202 PH: 1-65 I-905-10 ] 0 E.4�b1:� j� 122 FAX: 1-651-905-0700 L J �•�� IaLex Architecture, Itd a�. ssw paul v neseth & wynne g yelland 1211 west 24'" street minneapolis, minnesota 55405 612/374 5534 612/374 5570 fax August 27, 1998 City of Fridley Community Development Department 6431 University Avenue Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Members of the Appeals Commission: I am including this narrative to further explain the drawings submitted for vaziance for Lot 9, Block 1 of the Moore Lake Highlands Addition (far the renovation of the building currently on site at the corner of Hwy 65 and 63'� Avenue into a"street bank" or "cunency exchange" — the Money Exchange Street Bank). The variance application requests a grading and drainage plan, an erosion control plan and calculations for stormwater runoff. Our proposal will actuatly reduce the amount of paving on this lot (we are adding some landscaping, see the eastern edge of the site plan), so grading, drainage, erosion and stormwater should not be an issue. If a ptan addressing these tapics is necessary, please contact me. We have not included a utility map either, as we will not be changing the water, sewer or storm service that already exists in the building. Two other problematic issues have been presented to us by Scott Hickok and the Money Exchange partners: 1) the roll-up doors and 2) the canopy which previously covered the gas station pumps. We have eliminated the roll-up doors on the west side, and aze not proposing any new rolt-up doors for the building. We are proposing altering the canopy to beautify it, but not alter the basic configuration. For the first drive-thru bay (see site plan), we are praposing keeping the canopy (but restoring/painting the fascia & panels) as we have one drive up window for the street bank in the proposed plan. The remainder of the canopy would be stripped of its metal panels and fascia and the structure exposed and painted. The idea here is to encourage ptantings to grow up and over the overhead "trellis." This is shown on the site plan and elevation drawings. We have more than enough parking on site. The building footprint is approxunately 1,188 square feet, which wouid require eight spots (@ a ratio of 1 spot per I50 square feet). We are proposing 13 spots with one spot accessibie. If any further questions arise prior to the hearing, please do not hesitate to contact me at the telephone number or address listed above. AIA 23.15 � ... -> � r y ,�„s.t,... _ . . _ ` �/,�� C.1I1��`lil��'1��L� � �5� y �� z�• -• ' ' _ 45� 93V�:. :� x _ - �_ . _.. ._-� _ , - paul v neseth & wynne g yeliand ";.121 l.west 24'" street arinneapoGs�m�meaota 55405 612.3T4.SS34 612374.5570 fax December 14, t 998 Scott J. Hickok Planning Coordinaiar, City of Fridley 643 I University Avenue Northeast Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Dear Scott: I have reviewed the comments you forwarded to Mark Austin Smith on October 20, 1998 regard�g variances required for the Money Exchange proposal at 63`� Avenue and Highway b5. We have discussed alt�ati�s necessary, as well as variances which we will need regardless. I have included the latest changes to the'v proposal. The fotlowing list is our response or clarification to the seven variances listed in your lett�. 1. Parking stall size (Code requires 10' X 20') We have changed all of the stalls on the site to reflect Fridtey's code of 10' X 20'. Vi/e have retained an accessible space 2. Parking setbacks from Right-of-way (Code requires 20') We cannot comply with this oode and fit the required parking on the site for this business. We will have to apply for a variance. Variance reqaired 3. Paricing from side property line (Code requires 5') We do not have any parking on the narth side of the lot, but I was informed by someone in your office that this included paving. We wilt have difficulty complying with this if we are to include a driv�-thru window. We are praposing a continuous curb alang this edge to separate our property from die neighbor's. In any event, if we need a variance to pave within 5' of the side property line but not have any parldng, we will nced a variance for this as we(1. Varixnce may be reqnired 4. Parking setb�ck from building (Code requires 5''') We have changod all of the stalls that abut the build'mg to comply with this ordinance. 5. Parking drive aisle widd� (Code requires 25' for 2-way traffic) I believe our proposal complies with this. We have two-way traffic only at the curb cuts, which are ba�thh 32' wide. All of the othex lanes on site are ono-way and meet the 18' width requirem�t stipulated in the code. 6. Building setbacic from prop. iine (Code requires 1S', 30' w/ driveway) I Irnow we cannot connply with this on �e north property line, so we will nced a variance here. Variance reqaired � 7. Lot size (Code requires 20,000 s.f.) Obviously, we cannot comply with this. Variance reqnired 8. Curb cut on Frontage Road to Hwy 65 (Code requires 75' from corner to curb cut or ?J3 of lot frontage, whichever is less) We do comply. I just spoke with Paul and he informed me that we can come within 75' of the corner if we ue at least 2/3 of the Iot frontage from the corn�. The frontage is 89.7', so we would have to be at least 60' from the comer. Our driveway starts at approximately 64' from the c�ner, so I believe we aze in campliance. 23.16 If I have made any e�rors in my assumptions, please c�ntad me at 374 5534 or by faac at 374 5570. 'Ibanks for all yoar help in this matter. As I mentioned to you today, our office will be closed for the holiday from December 19'h until December 30'�. Regards, 23.17 CITY OF FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 13,1999 ROLL CALL: Chairperson Kuechle called the January 13, 1999, Appeals Commission eting to order at 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Larry Kuechle, Ken Vos, Terrie Mau, Biain Jones Members Absent: Carol Beaulieu Others Present: Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinat Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant ` Missy Daniels, Planning Assi nt Jon D. Peterson, 3104 Ha ' Avenue North, Roseville Gary Wruck, 6318 Highw 65 Mark Smith, 2848 Suns Boulevard, Minneapolis John Harwood, 7661 'gadoon Place Ralph & Gloria Swa on, 511 Ely Street N.E. Willard & Donna J nson, 560 Fairmont St. N.E. TI N by Ms. Mau, seconde by Dr. Vos, to approve the December 23, 1998, Appeals Commission minutes as writt . UPON A VOICE VOTE, L VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIE UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST. VAR #98-31. BY MONEY XCHANGE: Per Section 205.14.03.(A) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to decrease the minimum lot area from 20,000 square feet to 12,881 square feet; Per Section 205.14.03.C.(2).(a) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to decrease the minimum side yard setback from 15 feet to 0 feet; Per Section 205.14.05.D.(5).(b) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to decrease the minimum setback for a hard surFace area from the side lot line from 5 feet to 0 feet; Per Section 205.14.03.D.(5).(a) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to decrease the minimum setback for a hard surface area from the street right-of-way from 20 feet to 1.5 feet; To allow development of a commercial site on Lot 9, Block 1, Moore Lake Highlands, generally located at 6301 Highway 65 N.E. 23.18 M TI N by Ms. Mau, seconded by Mr. Jones, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:33 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated the petitioner is requesting five variances to open a check cashing facility. Money Xchange seeks to reuse an existing building at 6301 Highway 65. Mr. Hickok stated the subject parcel is located north of the Moore Lake shopping center at the intersection of the Highway 65 frontage drive and 63rd Street. The property is zoned C-2, General Business, and financial offices are a permitted use. The lot is 12,991 square feet in area. The minimum lot size required for the C-2 district is 20,000 square feet. Mr. Hickok stated the petitioner is requesting the following variances: to decrease the minimum lot area from 20,000 square feet to 12,991 square feet; to decrease the minimum side yard setback from 15 feet to 0 feet; to decrease the minimum setback for a hard surface area from the side lot line from 5 feet to 0 feet; and to decrease the minimum setback for a hard surface area from the street right-of-way from 20 feet to 1.5 feet. During the analysis, staff identified but did not put in the notice that the code requires a front yard setback of 35 feet. The canopy or overhang can encroach 2 feet into the setback. The proposed arbor projects 3 feet into the setback area. Therefore, a one-foot reduction in the arbor or a variance to reduced the setback from 35 feet to 34 feet is needed. Mr. Hickok reviewed the aerial photo of the site along with the variances as they relate to the property. Mr. Hickok stated the petitione�s hardship statement states: "All of our hardship arguments are based on the smallec lot size and working around the site with attention to parking requirements. I firmly believe that this plan of taking a pre-existing gas station and conve�ting it into a street bank is the highest and best use for the property. Furthermore, when weighing what variances we need with the items such as parking and traffic flow around the site, our project is as good as the site can produce." Mr. Hickok stated Moore Lake Highlands 3rd Addition was platted in 1954. The original building permit for this site was issued in 1956. The building permit states that they were going to use Lot 9 plus the south 10 feet of Lot 10. Since 1956, Lots 9 and 10 have functioned jointly. For a time, the lots served as a precursor to what we now know as a neighborhood convenience center. A dairy store occupied what would later become the White Wolf building, and a fuel and auto service occupied the comer site. In 1979, Lots 9, 10 and 11 were rezoned. Lots 9 and 10 were rezoned from C-1, Local Business, and Lot 11 from CR-1, General Office,.to C-2, General Business. At that time, The Lift Ski Shop occupied all three parcels. Mr. Hickok stated in 1988 the White Wolf began its operation with the north building used as a showroom and the south building used for binding mounting, storage, and repairs until 1998. When White Wolf left, the property owner approached the City and asked for feedback for future re-use. The City's message was to consolidate the parcels, remove the buildings, and seek a user who could use all three parcels, or at a minimum re-split the three lots into two larger lots. Mr. Gary Erickson approached the owner with the concept of creating a used vehicle sales operation on the three parcels. The City expressed concems about the intensity of the use adjacent to the neighbofiood. Mr. 23.19 Erickson applied for a special use permit for vehicle sales. The public hearing for this request was scheduled for June, 1998. The owner then decided to sell Lots 10 and 11 to a restoration/construction contractor shortly before the hearing. Contrary to earlier discussion, the owner chose to sell two of the three parcels leaving Lot 9 to be sold separately and creating a new set of circumstances for that parcel. Mr. Hickok stated Money Xchange is a check cashing facility. The company has other locations in Minneapolis and Bumsville. They also ship packages via Federal Express. Architecture Minnesota, July 1998 issue, featured the architect and Money Xchange building. The article is available for review. Mr. Hickok stated the Money Xchange representatives have discussed plans for a similar finish for this facility. The area of the building once used for service bays would be opened up to become a drive-through canopy for check cashing customers. A walk-up facility is also planned. The former canopy over the pumps would be replaced by a landscaped arbor. Mr. Hickok reviewed the site plan. One concem is the lack of snow storage area on the site. One request is to move the curb to the north property line, another is to allow the parking stalls to be within 1.5 feet of the property line, which eliminates north and south snow storage completely. The landscaped area on the front of the lot is somewhat reduced. The area in the rear to act as a buffer for the residential area is shown to be planted quite heavily to provide such a buffer to the east. Though the landscaping is beneficial, there is little snow storage on site. Mr. Hickok stated staff recommends denial of all of the requests. If the Commission chooses to recommend approval, staff recommends the following stipulations: 1. The wall adjacent to the north property line shall be a one-hour rated fire wall. 2. The curbing on the north property line shall be moved as far away from the front property line as possible without interfering with the circulation through the proposed drive-through aisle. Curb relocation plan to be approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. The architect for this project shall provide a full code review, to be submitted with application. 4. The petitioner shall provide a snow management plan to be approved by the City prior to issuance of the building permit. 5. The petitioner shall have certification that all tanks have been removed and all necessary site clean-up has been done related to in-ground tanks on site. 6. The building shall be brought up to current American Disability Act (ADA) codes due to the change in occupancy. These changes shall apply to both the building and the site. 7. A variance shall be obtained or a one-foot reduction in the arbor plans be made prior to the issuance of a building permit. Ms. Mau stated it appears as though the building exists on the property line. When built, 23.20 was the buiiding constructed on the property line? Mr. Hickok stated, yes. Ms. Mau asked if the proposed plan meets the parking requirements. Mr. Hickok stated, yes. As the Commission considers building placement, also consider the assumption by the originaf building that they were going to use 10 feet of the property to the north. Ms. Mau asked if the site has been cleared of the tanks. Mr. Hickok stated the City would want certification of this. He understands that some tanks may have been removed but the onus is on the petitioner to be certain that this has been taken care of. Ms. Mau asked what the City would like to see on this property, as the property will be nonconforming no matter what they da Mr. Hickok stated the ideal situation would be to consolidate the parcels into one. The second preference would be to divide the site into finro parcels. Ms. Mau asked if there is any development that could be done on that site without a variance. Mr. Hickok stated, no. Dr. Vos asked how many other parcels of a size similar and with C-2 zoning does the City have. Mr. Hickok stated the City has fragment parcels that are not independent development pieces. The City has a few sites that are pre-existing sites that, by today's standards if they were to redevelop, would be in the same situation. He did not have an inventory of lots with the same conditions that are waiting to be developed. Mr. Smith stated he is the President of Innovative Financial which is a financing company with three divisions—managing gaming facilities throughout the country; providing ATM management, ownership and services; and freestanding check cashing facilities under Money Xchange. Mr. Hickok visited the sites in Minneapolis and Bumsville. Mr. Smith stated he and the City have a difficult situation.� He is an interested party in taking an old gas station and converting it into a facility.. This is an existing lot with an existing gas station. The point is germane in that there is nothing they can do short of taking the building down, and then you cannot put anything on the site anyway. The lot is small. You cannot take 12,991 square feet and make it 20,000 square feet. He has worked with a architect, who he feels is the best in the State of Minnesota, to take this obtrusive building, put brick on the outside, and renovate it to standards of new construction. He can address stafPs issues. There are compromises and that is what a variance is all about. He has no problem putting up a fence instead of a curb to allay concerns about people driving through the property and driving up on the curb. He is willing to do anything reasonable. 23.21 Mr. Smith stated that regarding snow removal, they have another small site where they contract to have snow removed from the site with dump trucks. He is willing to make this a stipulation for this site as well. He knows of no reasons other than they are trying to take an existing condition and put their use on it. He has read the application. Some people feel it is a negative use. They are licensed by the State of Minnesota. They have a license in Fridley. They could also go into a strip center and could have a location with a pawn shop next to them. This adds a service to the community for those who cannot get bank accounts and do normal banking transactions. They do check cashing. The majority of their business is money orders and money grams. They do have a small lender's license so they can do loans from that business as well. Mr. Smith stated he cannot make the site bigger. He can only work with the architect to design something with aesthetic appeal. He would be willing to take the drive-through bay off the building to provide more room and just put in a small canopy so that the drive- up teller can be protected from the weather. He is willing to do that to add more cushion between the property lines: He has tried to do what they can with what they have been dealt. No one can operate a business on that property without a variance. He thought the architect did a good job of landscaping. They are willing to wo�lc with the City. Mr. Peterson stated he is the owner of the property. That is platted property. The three lots are identical. The same owner had all of the lots. When the Texaco station and dairy store were there, the lots were never delineated. The Lift entered an agreement with the Steiner Company in 1975. About that time, Texaco moved out and the tanks were removed. The Lift occupied it, then it became the White Wolf. He has owned the property since 1978. He could never do anything because of the long term lease with the ski shop. He would have liked to have seen some modemization of the building or treatments for a better looking facility. It has deteriorated over the years. He met with Mr. Wruck who was interested in purchasing the north building because of the type of business he has. Mr. Wruck has remodeled that extensively. Mr. Peterson stated his next concem is what would be good for the corner. He disagreed with Mr. Hickok's statement that consolidation of the lots was discussed with him because it never was. He would have liked to have sold the entire property as one parcel. The proposal for a used car lot would have encompassed the entire property, and he was told that would not be in great favor with the City. Most of the calls he gets are automotive related or entrepreneurial small business oriented. Mr. Smith is the only one wifling to come forward with a plan, willing to spend money to upgrade the comer, improve the looks and increase the value. He suggests that callers see City staff so they understand the guidelines. After doing so, they become very nervous because of the cost. He is very encouraged because Mr. Smith and his company are willing to spend some money to make this a great spot. He would like the City to consider this. Mr. Kuechle stated Mr. Peterson must have been aware that he would have problems with that lot size in trying to develop or build on it. Mr. Peterson stated he interpreted the code as new construction. This is platted property. with an existing building for all these years. He could agree if the building burned down or if he was building brand new. There are industrial buildings that have zero lot lines on a platted lot. This is a platted lot, and he expected that it could be utilized because it is there. He thought the important thing is to look at the opportunity to improve the looks rather than using it for storage or selling something out of the front door or something else that does not require a building permit. 23.22 Mr. Peterson stated they have put many requirements on Mr. Smith, and he is willing to work with the City on the requirements. The code is for new construction. This is remodeling an existing building. Texaco did not spare anything when they built those buildings. The building is very study. It does not leak. It would be a pity to tear it down. Mr. Wruck stated he owns Midwest Restoration and purchased Lots 10 and 11. He came from Mounds View where he leased property. He moved to get away from traffic and crowded par{cing lots. He had the opportunity to purchase three lots. He was not interested in the gas station but purchased the other two lots. He has concems about the zero variance on the north side of Lot 9, which faces his property. If there is only a curb, what would stop people from going over the curb or parking on his lot and walking over there? If they are right next to the building, people could assume they could park on either side. Certainly, that could be corrected with a fence. As far as snow storage, he has room to push the snow to the south but it would be up against the building. At one time, he was asked to give a variance on the north side. Once again, he is trying to stay away from traffic. There is a variance for a curb to be cut but that curb is one foot from his curb. Who knows if a customer would tum into the wrong parking lot? They probably have five cars each day. They could probably house 50 cars if needed. As far as business per se, they are pretty low key and quiet. He understands there would be more business there. They also have the liquor store as well. His concem is to keep people out of their property and be able to have that break. He does not favor zero clearance for that reason. Dr. Vos asked what the petitioner about hours of operation. ' Mr. Smith stated their hours are 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. M TI by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Jones, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:15 P.M. Dr. Vos stated the request would go to the City Council because it is commercial. There are so many precedent setting ones in this request that he would vote to deny the request. The petitioner has presented his case, and staff has presented its case. He did not see the need to approve the request at this level. He is concemed that two lots were sold and one was not. He thought one solution would be for one party to buy part of the adjacent property and do a lot split, but that is not happening. Mr. Kuechle stated he would also recommend denial to the City Couricil. He thought the number and extent of the requests is beyond what he could approve. The lot size alone plus the others is too many. Ms. Mau agreed. This is a package filled with problems. She sympathized with the owner. It is a problem situation. At the same time, she would have tried to find a way to split that property in half and make it a more viable property. There were so many comments by the neighbors regarding the proposed use of this property, There will be a business in that location eventually. She would be inclined to send the request to the City Council with a recommendation to deny. Mr. Jones agreed with all the points presented. There are too many variances. The main 23.23 one is that the property is too small to begin with. The best thing would have been to sell it as one unit or split it into two lots. In reading through the comments from the neighbors, no one is in favor of the request. He would recommend denial. T N by Ms. Mau, seconded by Mr. Jones, to recommend denial of Variance Request, VAR #98-31, by Money Xchange. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Hickok stated the City Council would consider this request on January 25. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #98-39 BY JOHN HARWOOD: Per Section 205.04.06.A.(3) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to increase the allowable encroachment into the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 13 feet to allow the replacement of an existing deck on Lot 4, Block 1, Blomberg's Estates, generally located at 7661 Brigadoon Place. TI by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Jones, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice ar�i to open the public hearing. UPON A V�QICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:19 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 13 feet in order to construct an open deck at 7661 Brigadoon Place. The property is located e�.st of Arthur Street between Osbome and 75th. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family, as are all the surrounding parcels. The code requires that open decks encroach n� more than 10 feet into any rear yard setback. The property has no previous land use acti�i history. The home was constructed in 1981. Mr. Bolin stated the petitione `s hardship states: "Due to poor original construction ... we had to remove the deck fro our house and reconstruct rotted studs and joists in the north wall of our residence. The ariance is consistent with the neighboring deck location." Mr. Bolin stated he and Mr. Hickok vis d the site and noticed that there are some possible altematives to allow the deck t e built without a variance. He showed some pictures of the site. One altemative may to bring the deck out and wrap it around so ii is at the side of the home. \ Mr. Boiin stated similar requests have been recommendation regarding this request. Mr. Jones asked if the original deck encroached. Mr. Bolin stated, no. in the past. Therefore, staff has no Ms. Mau asked if the petitioner is proposing to expand the Mr. Bolin stated, yes. 23.24 the deck. � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF arroF JANUARY 25, 1999 FRIDLEY INFORMAL STATUS REPURTS