The URL can be used to link to this page

10/09/2000 - 4684� OFFICIAL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 9, 2000 �� Y � . , �,,�._ � .�._, . .� , ' Y ' � FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MFETING � a�ir ATTENDENCE SHEET Manc�a.y, �c.tabe�c. 9, 2000 � - 7:30 P.M. PLEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN ITEM PRINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS NUMBER r � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CRY OF FRIDLEY 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) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PROCLAMATION: Minnesota Manufacturers Week: October 16-22, 2000 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of September 25, 2000 NEW BUSINESS: Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting ofSeptember 20, 2000 ................................................................. 1- 16 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 2. Master Plan Amendment and Project Plan Approval, MPA #00-01, by Medtronic Inc., to Construct a Free-Standing Day Care Center, Generally Located at the Corner of Medtronic Parkway and Seventh Street �� _ 20 (Ward 1) ..................................................... 3. Special Use Permit, SP #00-10, by Vanman Companies Architects and Builders, Inc., to Build an Addition to an Existing Church Building (Redeemer Lutheran Church) Within a Residential District, Generally Located at 2� _ 24 61 Mississippi Way N.E. (Ward 3) ....•.••�•••••••••�•�••�•�••�•�•�•�•• 4. Prefiminary Plat, P.S. #00-02, by Brickner Builders, to Create Two Lots for Single Family Home Development, 25 - 2$ Generally Located at 7440 Bacon Drive N.E. (Ward 2) ................ 5. Special Use Permit, SP #00-09, by APT Minneapolis, Inc., for the Installation and Operation of a Wireless Telecommunications Tower, Generally Located at 29 _ 33 7900 Beech Street N.E. (Ward 3) ............... 6. Request by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority to Remove Trees on the Gateway East Project Site, Generally Located Near the Corner of _ 34 - 35 57th Avenue and University Avenue (Ward 1) ........................ FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 7. Approve Change Order No. 4 to Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 —1 .............................................................. 36 - 38 8. Resolution Abating Special Assessments for the Riverview Heights Area Improvement Project .............................. 39 - 41 9. Resolution Relating to the City of Fridley's Tax Rate Authorization for the Year 2001 .................................................... 42 - 43 10. Appointment ................................................................................. 44 11. Claims ....................................................................................... 45 12. Licenses ....................................................................................... 46 - 47 13. Estimates ...................................................................................... 48 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 PAGE 4 ADOPTION OF AGENDA. OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: Consideration of items not on Agenda — 15 minutes. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 14. To Evaluate the Cable System Franchise Proposal Submitted by WideOpenWest Minnesota, LLC (Continued From September 25, 2000) ................................................................ 49 15. Consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-02, by Qwest Wireless, LLC, to Create an Approved Site for the Installation of Towers or Wireless Telecommunications Facilities, Generally Located in the Right-of-Way at 1200 Cheri Lane N.E. (Ward 1) .......................................................... 50 - 55 16. Proposed Assessment for the 2000 Weed Abatement ...................... 56 - 57 17. Proposed Assessment for the 2000 Nuisance Abatement ................... 58 - 59 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 PAGE 5 PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED): 18. Proposed Assessment for the 2000 Tree Abatement ........................ 60 - 61 19. Proposed Assessment for East River Road Improvement Project No. 1995 — 4 .................................................... 62 - 63 20. Proposed Assessment for Central Avenue Improvement Project No. 1998 — 4 .................................................... 64 - 65 21. Proposed Assessment for Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 — 1 .................................................................... 66 - 67 22. Proposed Assessment for the Rice Creek Phase 2 Bank Stabilization Project .................................................... 68 - 69 OLD BUSINESS: 23. Resolution Regarding Advanced Corridor Plan for the NCDA Northstar Commuter Rail Station (Tabled September 25, 2000) ......................................................................... 70 - 74 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 PAGE 6 OLD BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 24. Resolution Amending the Transportation Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan Regarding a Station Area Plan for the NCDA Commuter Rail Station Site (Tabled September 25, 2000) ............................................................ 75 - 89 NEW BUSINESS: 25. First Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by Adding an Approved Site to Chapter 205, "Zoning," Telecommunications Towers, Section 205.30, AppendixA ....................................................................................... 90 - 97 26. Resolution Supporting Application for MPCA Grant Funds for the Springbrook Subwatershed Storm Water Management Project ............................................................... 98 - 101 27. Resolution Adopting Assessment for 2000 Weed Abatement....................................................................................... 102 - 104 28. Resolution Adopting Assessment for 2000 NuisanceAbatement .......................................................................... 105 - 107 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 _ PAGE 7 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 29. Resolution Adopting Assessment for 2000 Tree Abatement ................................................................................. 108 - 110 30. Resolution Adopting Assessment for East River Road Improvement Project No. 1995 — 4 - .................................. 111 1 4 31. Resolution Adopting Assessment for Central Avenue Improvement Project No. ST. 1998 — 4 ................................. 115 - 119 32. Resolution Adopting the Assessment for Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 — 1 ............................................... 120 - 127 33. Resolution Adopting the Assessment for Rice Creek Phase 2 Bank Stabilization Project .......................................... 128 - 132 • a � 34. Informal Status Report ....................................................................... 133 ADJOURN. : t ` ' ' �(pe��'s-C�p � ' � `� I FItIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 QTY OF FRIDLEY 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) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PROCLAMATION: Minnesota Manufacturers Week: October 16-22, 2000 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: �g/ n`� �ng� ;� (,NwaJ �o ( U #� �" �p City Gouncil Meeting of September 25, 2000 � ��o�,��►3� NEW BUSINESS: Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of September 20, 2000 ...................................... 1 - 16 2. Master Plan Amendment and Project Plan Approval, MPA#00-01, by Medtronic Inc., to Construct a Free-Standing Day Care Center, Generally Located at the Corner of Medtronic Parkway and Seventh Street (Ward 1) ....................................... 17 - 20 Special Use Permit, SP #00-10, by Vanman Companies Architects and Builders, Inc., to Build an Addition to an Existing Church Building (Redeemer Lutheran Church) Within a Residential District, Generally Located at 61 Mississippi Way N.E. (Ward 3) ..................:................ 21 - 24 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 4. Preliminary Plat, P.S. #00-02, by Brickner Builders, to Create Two Lots for Single Family Home Development, Generally Located at 7440 Bacon Drive N.E. (Ward 2) ......................... 25 - 28 Special Use Permit, SP #00-09, by APT Minneapolis, Inc., for the Installation and Operation of a Wireless Telecommunications Tower, Generally Located at 7900 Beech Street N.E. (Ward 3) ..... 29 - 33 6. Request by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority to Remove Trees on the Gateway East Project Site, Generally Located Near the Corner of 57'" Avenue and University Avenue (Ward 1) ....................................... 34 — 35 � �� f� e� 7. Approve Change Order No. 4 to Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 —1 ................. 36 - 38 Resolution Abating Special Assessments for the Riverview Heights Area Improvement Project ....................................... 39 - 41 �� FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 9. Resolution Relating to the City of Fridley's Tax Rate Authorization for the Year 2001 ................................ � 42 - 43 � 10. Appointment .................................... 44 11. Claims ....................................... 45 12. Licenses ....................................... 46 - 47 13. Estimates ......................................48 ADOPTION OF AGENDA. �� v�� _. OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: Consideration of items not on Agenda —15 minutes. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 14. ,. � .� .. To Evaluate the Cable System Franchise Proposal Submitted by WideOpenWest Minnesota, LLC (Continued from September 25, 2000� ,� Ablfi�� cvf^'''� � ��k � � � � I �� ,��" , � �c� w�� b : i ,� PAGE 2 : , PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED): 15. Consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-02, by Qwest Wireless, LLC, to Create an Approved Site for the Installation of Towers or Wireless Telecommunications Facilities, Generally Located in the Right-of-Way at 1200 Cheri Lane N. E. (Ward 1) ...................................... 50 - 55 S��!�P`� � ' � � o �✓� �`� � � � � �� a5 16. Proposed Assessment for the 2000 Weed Abatement ...................................... 56 - 57 ��[� ��''" �_,�� `�� 17 � Proposed Assessment for the 2000 Nuisance Abatement ......................... .... ...... 58 - 59 �,��`c�, � �� o �f�[� rc..r�:�� 1�,�.f 1�� I�-� c��':�1 Proposed Assessment for the 2000 Tree Abatement ....................................... 60 - 61 �'�(sC� op� �'�3( At3i�,� cc� �'�� 19. Proposed Assessment for East River Road Improvement Project o. 1995 — 4 ... 62 - 63 p;�6� R� a� ��3� � P$�RB ��D� g��s`� 20. Proposed Assessment for Central Avenue Improvement Project No. 199 — 4........ 64 - 6 �� g��3� ��ls� c�w �`�� 21. Proposed Assessment for Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 — 1 ....................... 66 - 67 �� °.��"' g' 3�--P �� S� C[os� g'. 3�' FItIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED): 22. Proposed Assessment for the Rice Creek Phase 2 Bank Stabilization Project ..�.. 68 - 69 l�� bU"- - �� do�- �-' 4�� OLD BUSINESS: �� 23. Resolution Regarding Advanced Corridor Plan for the NCDA Northstar Commuter Rail Station (Tabled September 25, 2000) ............................. 70 - 74 a��`0� s �� NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): PAGE 3 28. Resolution Adopting Assessment for 2000 Nuisance Abatement ............................. 105 -107 6�J �►-4[X %�� "` d� ��-�'�Q ' 2. Resolution Adopting Assessment for 2000 �� Tree Abatement ..................................... 108 -11 C�� -.��- �/S� `�,`� � je�� S� Resolution Adopting Assessment for East River Road Improvement Project No. '�,� �� 4,�1Pro�' �5�' �zd � � 1995 - 4 ............... . . ...................... �"'�'D 3 �t.�.�e.a.�, ��S1�a.0 Ie.c,t 24. Resolution Amending��ans�ion CKapt'� �/�°�" �� of the Comprehensive Plan Regarding a Station �� ,01� �^" 1yl��.u.��" ��t.�1�e.r Area Plan for the NCDA Commuter Rail Station Si �� .� i��/� t�a� � (Tabled September 25, 2000) ................ 75 - 89 Tl " P��3 ��,�. �b�,�l,� � � 111 - 114 i � ,/� - . � �� Resolution Adopting Assessment for Central ��R _ ��. NEW BUSINESS: 25. First Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by Adding an Approved Site to Chapter 205, "Zoning," Telecommunications Towers, Section 205.30, AppenS� .................. �.�.......5 �-i .. y90 - 97 �j�Q, O�pro„� r-� p� � � Ro �� 26. Resolution Supporting Application for MPCA Grant Funds for the Springbrook Subwatershed Storm Water Management Project ................... 98 - 101 �� 27. Resolution Adopting Assessment for 2000 Weed Abatement ....................................... 102 -104 Avenue Improvement Project No. ST. �� 1998 - 4 ..... ................................. 115 - 119 �� /�,� �� 2. Resolution Adopting the Assessment for Street � Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 -1 .. 120 - 127 � �/� n � /�'Sa � 33. Resolution Adopting the Assessment for Rice Creek Phase 2 Bank Stabilization - Project 128 - 132 �.��.c��S� #(� _ mo.�.-aa� �,�� Y-2,Q.S SB��'G�pOrUVC� � r�%jCt�' �o 34. Informal Status Report ......................, �� J� ��- %�/%� �� ADJOURN. �✓e� � I �� ; � / �1 PL °` �P�'a �SI /�1— .. 133 —I — I = __ �- � �- MINN�SOTA MANUFACTUI�ERS WE�K OCTOBER 16�22, 2000 WHEREAS, manufacturing has the largest total payroll of any business sector in Minnesota, providing $18 billion in 1998 wages; and WHEREAS, manufachtring companies in Minnesota employed 445, 891 people in August, 2000; and WHEREAS, manufacturing produces $28.3 billion for the state economy and is the second largest single share (18.9%) of our gross product; and, WHEREAS, manufacturing �ports brought nearly $9.2 billion into the Minnesota economy in 1999; and, WHEREAS, manufacturing provides h.igh skill, high wage jobs which significantly contribute to Minnesota's high standard of living and economic vitality; and, WHEREAS, manufacturing contributed nearly $232 million in corporate income taxes in Minnesota, more than any other business sector (about 30 percent of total corporate income taxes in 1999); and WHEREAS, manufacturers located in Fridley serve local, state, national, and international markets, and constitute a significant portion of the tax base supporting City services; NOW THEREFORE, I, Nancy J. Jorgenson, Mayor of the City of Fridley, do hereby proclaim the week of October 16-22, 2000, to be: MINNESOTA MANUFACTtJ1iEBS WEEK in the City of Fridley in recognition of the contributions of Fridley manufacturers to the social and economic well being of our community and to the State of Minnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Fridley to be affviced this 9�h day of October, 2000. NANCY J. JORGENSON, MAYOR THE MINUTES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order by Mayor Jorgenson at 7:30 p.m. She asked Councilmember-at-Large Barnette to conduct the meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Councilmember-at-Large Barnette led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Mayor Jorgenson, Councilmember-at-Large Barnette, Councilmember Billings, Councilmember Wolfe, and Councilmember Bolkcom Members Absent: None STATEMENT OF MEETING CONDUCT: Please be reminded that those present at today's meeting may hold a variety of views and opinions regarding the business to be conducted. The exercise of democracy through representative local government requires that ALL points of view be accommodated at these proceedings. It is further expected that a standazd of mutual courtesy and respectfulness be exercised by all in attendance, through our individual expression, manner of speaking, and conduct. Therefore, please receive the views of others with the same degree of courtesy and respect which you desire to be given your views and opinions. Any departures from this standard will be addressed by the Presiding Officer through whatever means are deemed appropriate. Thank you for your attendance at today's meeting, and your agreement to abide by these standards of personal conduct. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: Councilmember Billings stated that he would like Item Nos. 2 and 3 of the consent agenda to be removed and placed after Item No. 11. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the proposed consent agenda with the exception of Item No. 2 and Item No. 3 under New Business of the consent agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 2 PROCLAMATIONS: Student Forei�n Exchange Week: September 25 - October 1, 2000 Alfiya Battalova - Russia Andrew Beauchamp - New Zealand Carol Rodriquez Lora - Dominican Republic Councilmember-at-Large Barnette Barnette stated that these individuals are being honored tonight as the foreign exchange students. Mr. Andrew Beauchamp stated that he is attending Fridley High School and enjoying his stay here. Ms. Alfiya Battalova stated that she is attending Totino-Grace High School, likes the school, and is enjoying her experience here. Ms. Carol Rodriquez Lora stated that she is attending Totino-Grace, is glad she has the chance to attend. She said that the people are very friendly. The Council presented the plaques to the students. Councilmember-at-Large Barnette thanked them for being part of our community. Ms. Jan ??? and Mr. Stan Kowalski, VFW representatives, presented the students with an American flag, a VFW poppy, a ruler with the pledge of allegiance and presidents on the back, a stars and stripes flag etiquette book, and a brochure telling the buddy poppy veterans story. Fire Prevention Week: October 8- 14, 2000 Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that the City of Fridley commemorates this event each year by renewing its fire education efforts in the community, particularly in our schools. Domestic Violence Awareness Month: October, 2000 Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that domestic violence will be eliminated through community partnerships of concerned individuals and organizations working together to prevent abuse while at the same time effecting social and legal change. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meetin� of September 11, 2000. APPROVED. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25. 2000 PAGE 3 NEW BUSINESS: 1. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2000: RECEIVED THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 6, 2000. 2. RESOLUTION NO. ??-2000 APPROVING A SUBDIVISION, LOT SPLIT, LS #00-04, TO ESTABLISH A SIZE CONFORMING COMMERCIAL LOT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5943 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. (BY EARL WEIKLE & SONS AND VAN-O-LITE)(WARD 1): REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED AFTER ITEM NO. 11 OF NEW BUSINESS. 3. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #00-21, BY EARL WEIKLE & SONS, TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED PARKING SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO 10 FEET, TO REDUCE THE 15 FOOT PLANTING STRIP TO 10 FEET, AND TO REDUCE THE PARKING STALL WIDTH FROM 10 FEET TO 9 FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5943 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. (WARD ?): THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED AFTER ITEM NO. 11 OF NEW BUSINESS. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 86-2000 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT NO. 80733 BETWEEN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (UNIVERSITY AVENUE DITCH PROJECT): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated this is a cooperative agreement that provides for the reimbursement of the cost of pipe used in the University Avenue ditch enclosure project. Under the terms of the agreement, the City will receive $32,170. In exchange for the State contribution, the City has agreed to maintain the new storm sewer for a period of ten years. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 86-2000. 5. APPOINTMENT TO CITY OF FRIDLEY COMMISSION: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that staff recommended the appointment of Ms. Mary Gliniany to fill a vacancy on the Environmental Quality and Energy Commission. Ms. Gliniany has been a Fridley resident for 32 years and has substantial experience with environmental issues. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 _ PAGE 4 APPROVED. 6. CLAIMS: APPROVED CLAIM NOS. 95344 THROUGH 95698. 7. LICENSES: APPROVED LICENSES AS SUBMITTED. 8. ESTIMATES: APPROVED ESTIMATES AS FOLLOWS: Park Construction Company 7900 Beech Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 TH47 West Ditch Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 - 6 FINAL ESTIMATE: W.B. Miller, Inc. 6701 Norris Lake Road N.W. Elk River, MN 55330 Rice Creek Bank Stabilization, Phase II Project No. 333 FiNAL ESTIMATE W.B. Miller, Inc. 6701 Norris Lake Road N.W. Elk River, MN 55330 2000 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 - 1 Estimate No. 6 Carl J. Newquist, Esq. Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered 301 Fridley Plaza Offic Building 6401 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432-4381 Services Rendered as City Prosecuting Attorney For the Month of June, 2000 $ 18,475.54 $ 3,527.13 $ 41,295.08 $ 19,340.00 FRIDLEY_CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 5 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the agenda with the addition of Item No. 2 and Item No. 3 to be placed after Item No. 1 l. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM,VISITORS: Mr. Ray McAfee, 1360 Hillcrest Drive N.E., stated that he has a petition asking Council to remove the road construction planned for the year 2001 on Woody Lane, Hillcrest Drive, Gardena Lane, Gardena Circle, and Tennison Drive. He asked Mr. Bob Nordahl, the City's Operations Analyst, if the construction was an optional thing. Mr. Nordahl stated that if a petition was signed by fifty percent (50%) or more of the people involved to vote one way or the other, Council would vote on the issue. Mr. McAfee thought that with P-rock and sealcoat, the residents would end up with as good a street as they have had for the last twenty years. He was amazed at the number of people who thought the same way he did. Mr. McAfee said that he has talked to Mr. John Flora, Public Works Director, Mr. Jon Haulcass, Assistant Public Works Director, and Mr. Nordahl, regarding sealcoating. He found out that the City's sealcoat's cycle is eight years. It was last done in 1993, so the streets are due for a sealcoat. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to receive Petition No. 2000-6. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Flora stated that the City has received six letters from residents in that neighborhood in support of the project. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to receive the letters. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Jean Lindquist, 1326 Hillcrest Drive N.E., stated that she was informed that this street was chosen because it was one of the streets in the worst condition and needed asphalt, curb, and gutters. She said that Hillcrest Drive is in terrible condition. She thought this issue was a no- brainer because the State would give sixty percent (60%) for State Aid funding. General Capital Improvements would give fifteen percent (15%), which leaves twenty-five percent (25%) less for the property owners to pay. She thought it was a bargain. It would cost the City money to patch FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25�_2000 PAGE 6 all the time with t�payers' money. She asked if they did not get a new street if they would be scheduled for another sealcoat next year. Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that Hillcrest Drive is scheduled for sealcoating next year. Mr. Flora stated that a sealcoat is applied every eight years. It is waterproofing base on the surface. It is a temporary fix. The proposed project is for concrete curb and gutter to provide drainage and to improve the strength of the street. Ms. Lindquist stated that she did not think people who signed the petition understood it correctly. Mr. Flora stated that the only cost the citizens would be paying for is the concrete curb and gutter which is approximately $14 per front foot. Ms. Lindquist asked if people always have a say on something like this. Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that a neighborhood meeting was held, and letters were sent regarding this. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what the normal process for this was. Mr. Flora stated that an information meeting is scheduled in the spring. Then, it is brought to the Council. After that, specifications are completed and Council has a hearing for residents regarding the cost of the proposed project. Council would then approve the project, and bids would be advertised for and awarded. Construction would start the following spring around May. After the project has been completed, there would be a final assessment hearing around November when the exact cost would be provided to the residents. The hearing would be held and approved, and the residents would have thirty days to pay for the project without any interest or they could put it on the tax rolls for ten years or any time they wanted to decrease the interest charged. May or Jorgenson asked Mr. Flora if there are problems with water coming down Hillcrest. Mr. Flora stated that the new concrete curb and gutter would provide a drainage system for all the surface water collecting on the street running off of the properties. This then goes into the storm system and is then taken to the creek or lake. Ms. Leona Hanson, 1321 Hillcrest Drive, stated that they have hills, and water is draining into basements and onto driveways. She said the slopes have also changed a little. She thought the street looked like a patchwork quilt. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what the petition meant by including the P-rock, sealcoat, and curbing replacements. She asked if the residents were asking for new concrete curb and gutter. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25 2000 PAGE 7 Mr. McAfee stated that he was told that the P-rock and sealcoat would be done, and the City would replace curbing that was necessary at that time. That is why he put down curb replacement. Mr. McAfee stated that the main reason people signed the petition was because they did not want to put up with the mess for three months and did not think they needed a new street and curbing. He did not go azound trying to talk anybody into signing this. In the 46 years he has lived there, he has always been able to get to his house. He agreed that the street looks patched but thought that the sealcoat and the P-rock would make it look normally one color. Many people that did not sign the petition were looking for a free driveway by thinking the City would come in 15 feet to replace their driveway. On one end of the cul-de-sac of Woody Lane there is curbing already. Over on Tennison there is a block of the same thing. Everybody wants a nice looking street, but on Tennison Drive there is a neighbor at 5800 Tension Drive that the City should inspect. Mr. Richard Lindquist, 1326 Hillcrest Drive, stated that he believed the street had not been replaced in 40 years rather than the 25 years as previously stated. The proposal stated that the City is replacing the worst streets in Fridley, so Hillcrest Drive must be one of the worst. Councilmember Billings stated that it has long been the policy of the City of Fridley that Council would not build streets in neighborhoods where the residents do not want them. There are other neighborhoods that would gladly like to have their streets done a year earlier. The purpose of the neighborhood meeting was to see if there were any objections to this before the City started doing the engineering work. This may mean that the City would not have a 2001 street project, but it also means that the City can double up in the year 2002. Councilmember Wolfe stated that he would like to see another neighborhood meeting because he received a number of telephone calls from people who have signed the petition who learned more details and would now like their names removed from the petition. Councilmember Wolfe said it is important to get the facts to the residents. Before anyone signs any petition, it is important to get all the information. Councilmember Billings asked Councilmember Wolfe if he was going to coordinate a date with the City Engineer for a neighborhood meeting and send letters to the neighborhood regarding that date. Councilmember Wolfe stated that was correct. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she would also encourage every resident to be at that meeting to hear the information and to voice opinions. Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that letters would be sent to all homes in this area. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25 2000 PAGE 8 PUBLIC HEARING: 9. TO EVALUATE THE CABLE SYSTEM FRANCHISE PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY WIDEOPENWEST MINNESOTA, LLC: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:11 P.M. Mr. Champa, Management Assistant, stated that this item evaluates the cable system franchise proposal submitted by the applicant WideOpenWest Minnesota, LLC. This serves to discuss the applicant's credentials and to begin preliminary discussion of a draft ordinance granting the cable franchise to WideOpenWest Minnesota. Minnesota law requires that any cable company operating in a city to first be granted a franchise by the City. This is accomplished by the ordinance process. There is currently one cable operator in Fridley, and that is Time Warner. Time Warner's franchise is non-exclusive meaning that any cable company has the legal right to make an application for a franchise. Once an application is received, the applicant is evaluated on the technical, legal and financial qualifications. Federal and State law require that the contents of any new franchise be substantially the same as the franchise ordinance of the incumbent cable television operator. This is known as a level playing field. Mr. Champa stated that Minnesota State Statute, Section 238, and City Charter, Chapter 10 provide the legal framework for evaluating and granting the cable television franchise. In late March, the City received a letter from WideOpenWest requesting a cable television franchise. After reviewing State Statute and City Charter, a notice of intent was published two times in our official newspaper, Focus News. This notice was also mailed to Time Warner Cable. The notice of intent referred applicants to two additional documents: the Cable Communications System Requests for Proposals and a Technical Specification memorandum. These documents provide more detail of the franchising process and the City's technical requirements. The closing date for the applications was August 14. One response was received. Staff reviewed the material and found no reason to deny the franchise. Staff sought comments from the Cable Commission and provided the Cable Commission with the same agenda packet material seen tonight. Mr. Chris Julian, Vice-President of Market Developments for WideOpenWest, stated that Mr. John Manka, Vice President of Corporate Market Development, was also present. Mr. Julian stated that the network they plan to build would offer Internet, cable television, Internet-based telephone, and would be extremely fast. Mr. Julian said WideOpenWest would be an open access network allowing other Internet service providers onto the network which is rare. Other than the City of St. Paul, WideOpenWest is intending to build their network west of the. Mississippi River. FRIDLEY CITY COUNC_I_L MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 9 Mr. Julian stated that their company mission is "be the best at what we do. We want to build and operate the country's best residential fiber-optic based, high bandwidth Internet digital and cable television network." Their senior management has a great deal of experience in the cable industry. Many aze from RCN based in New Jersey, WideOpenWest is called an overbuilder because they build the cable network over the top of the incumbents'. RCN was the first overbuilder of note. RCN has been able to raise over $4,000,000 to build a fiber optic network. He said WideOpenWest believes they can do a good job in Fridley. The have the experience in project management, engineering, system design, materials acquisition, technical support, customer service, sales, and marketing. Mr. Julian stated that most of what they do would be done in-house by their company. They were formed in the middle of last year. Their corporate headquarters are in Denver. Current shareholders are in two basic groups. The company management has 22 percent of the company. The have fourteen franchises typically clustered in certain areas in Denver, Boulder, Tucson, St. Louis, and Fort Worth. They are going to have a fiber-optic ring that goes azound the Twin- Cities metroplex with a head-end to receive the signal. A signal would be sent to hub sites which would feed 20,000 homes and then down to nodes feeding 150 homes. They are going to put in extra fiber on the poles, so it is easier to upgrade the system. Mr. Julian stated that they are going to have a 850 megahertz system with two-way fiber. Most networks in the area currently are upgrading to 750 megahertz, so their brand new network would be state of the art. The smaller node sizes mean faster Internet speeds. Their basic service would be eighty channels with unscrambled service. Another 350 channels would be available for digital capability. Video-on-demand would have up to 350 channels broken down by category that you would be able to access right on the TV screen. They would download that movie so you can watch that movie when you wanted. You would be able to rewind back to the part of the movie where you might have fallen asleep. You would be able to pause the movie so you could watch it as many times as you wanted within a 24 hour period. It also includes digital music, pay per view, and signals for HGTV as they become more available. Internet service currently gives 56,000 bytes per second. Their system offers 10,000,000 bytes per second. They would be an open access network, so if there are local based Internet providers that want to have access to the network, they would allow that. They are going to have to better than the competition. Time Warner is a big, good company, but WideOpenWest is far superior to them. WideOpenWest will give customers specific appointment times, and they have competitive pricing. Mr. Julian stated that the benefits to the consumer are that the consumers will have super high bandwidth, always on Internet service, competition, and freedom of choice among Internet service providers, a new choice for cable service, and voice-over Internet telephone. The benefits to the City are that there will be increased franchise revenue, free fiber I-net to hook up City buildings as well as the schools. A better network will be built on the same schedule, pay the same franchise fee, and carry all the local access channels. Communication is the most important part. WideOpenWest would like to have a comprehensive communication plan with the residents as well as with the City. They would be well identified with a unique truck and khaki shirts with logos and nametags. Training of staff is very detailed. WideOpenWest looks FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25z2000 PAGE 10 forward to hopefully providing service to the citizens of the City of Fridley in the very near future. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Julian clarification regarding the service area with St. Paul east of the Mississippi River area. Mr. Julian stated that the company jokingly says that they are going west of the Mississippi River, except St. Paul is to the east. Councilmember Billings asked what areas they plan on seeking franchises in. Mr. Julian stated that they did not apply to Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission, Farmington, Rosemount, Shakopee not the St. Croix Commission. Councilmember Billings asked what the status is with the rest of the entities around the metropolitan twin cities area. Mr. Julian stated that Fridley is a little bit behind, halfway compared to the other cities. Bloomington has the first franchise. Their financial and technical qualifications have been approved by Northern Dakota County Cable Commission, Southwestern Cable Commission, and City of Bloomington. WideOpenWest has a franchise pending the franchise document at Northwest Suburbs Cable Commission. WideOpenWest has been approved in Lakeville in terms of financial, legal and technical qualifications. The southwest corner seems to be farther ahead. Councilmember Billings asked if Mr. Julian would expect the entire Minneapolis/St. Paul area to be up and running at approximately the same time or if would be phased in over multiple periods. Mr. Julian stated that it would take approximately five years. He could not tell when they were going to build until they had physical franchises. Then, they could start deciding. He said he would like to see that the franchise areas are contiguous to each other so he could go from one nicely into the next one. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Julian, regarding the Institutional network (I-net), what kind of provisions existed if WideOpenWest discontinued the franchise. He also asked if the City could purchase that I-net from WideOpenWest so it could remain in place. Mr. Julian stated that they would not just up and leave due to the amount of money they are spending in the area. They provide the fiber to all the locations. It is up to the City and schools to provide the equipment at the end. He would not have much to do with the I-net on a day-to- day basis. That would be a closed system to the City. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Julian if they would be working with the other provider to provide public access channels, government channels, etc. He asked how WideOpenWest would accomplish that. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 11 Mr. Julian stated that they are not interested in duplicating what Fridley already has. WideOpenWest is in the process of supplying language to offset that. He did not know what it was yet. In terms of interconnection, that is something the City would have to agree on. He did not see any issues relating to interconnection at all. Councilmember Billings stated that he wanted to make sure the residents would not get locked into the current provider from the standpoint that the current provider is the only one who airs the Council meetings. He asked if that was something previously worked out in the other franchises. Mr. Julian stated that they are obligated to provide the identical channels. They would offer the same program on the same channel. Mr. Manka, stated that if WideOpenWest did not come to an interconnection agreement. They would get the feed from each studio if need be. A member of the audience stated that the speeds would be nice for Internet use, but with the average technology, she asked if people would have to upgrade. Mr. Manka, stated that they would check the wiring in the home. If it is not adequate, they would have to change it at no extra charge. Mr. Leupold, Time Warner representative, stated that they understood and appreciated the fact that the current franchise is non-exclusive. Time Warner has had competition for a long time. They welcome the competition challenge. Time Warner expects the City to fully consider the legal, technical, and financial considerations of each applicant. Time Warner is very committed to working with the City to assure that the necessary coordination is there. Mr. Champa stated that the City has proposed sharing some services like public access the City has put some language in the proposed ordinance where the applicant could either provide the service or work out an agreement with the incumbent operator. The City will highlight those more at the next meeting. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to continue this public hearing until October 9. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESS: 10. RESOLUTION REGARDING ADVANCED CORRIDOR PLAN FOR THE NCDA NORTHSTAR COMMUTER RAIL PROJECT: MOTION by Councilmember Billings to open this item for discussion. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 12 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this presentation will focus on some issues heard at the Planning Commission meeting on September 6. The recommendation made by the Planning Commission that night was a fve to one vote suggesting that Council consider the Advanced Corridor Plan subject to twelve sets of comments. The Planning Commission recommended a inclusion of the station area plan language submitted by staff into the Comprehensive Plan. They also suggested to staff, if approved, to initiate an overlay zoning district process for land uses and types of development in and azound the station site. Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission recommended that Northstar representatives investigate ways to mitigate the traffic impacts from the park-and-ride site. One suggestion was to reduce the size of the parking lot on the east side and possibly increase the parking lot size on the west side. It was suggested that there be some type of separation between the neighborhood on the east side of 61 St Avenue with the park-and-ride site. Staff also asked the NCDA to look at different access points to evaluate some options with turning movements or signs. Staff made a recommendation that the pazking lot share a driveway with the undeveloped parcel that remains on the east side. There is also some property related detail about the size of the property on the east side. Staff asked that the NCDA look for alternative locations for the storm ponds. Staff suggested to Council and the NCDA that the parking lot be developed to the typical standards for a commercial/industrial use including landscaping requirements. Staff also suggested that the petitioner come through the plat process. On the west side, the Planning Commission suggested that there be a maintained connection on Ashton Avenue. The City suggested to theNCDA that they make the central control facility for the NCDA here on this site. Staff indicated that the pedestrian underpass underneath the railroad tracks is a crucial connection in terms of pedestrian connections. The site plan can connect the existing facilities for sidewalks and bikeways around the site. There were questions on the impacts to the railroad crossings north of this site in the City. It was suggested that any potential traffic conflicts with traffic accessing or leaving Stevenson Elementary School. The Planning Commission added a condition that the City request some type of assurance on long-term maintenance of the upkeep on the property in general. Ms. Dacy stated that the proposed park-and-ride site be identified on the east side of the tracks with 441 spaces. On the west side of the railroad tracks is a smaller park-and-ride site with 261 spaces north of the Tri-Staz Insulation facility. Staff received a revised site plan since the Planning Commission meeting from the Northstar representatives on Thursday, September 22. The plan is to reduce the size of the pazk-and-ride site on the east side. The platforms are still where they were proposed, and the parking lot has been reduced from 441 spaces to 330 spaces. Two driveways are proposed into the site. One is proposed across from 60th Way,and another one is proposed at mid-block. No longer is there vehicular access from 61St Avenue suggestion was made that the southerly driveway on the east side of the parking lot be changed to a right turn, so the only full movement access would be mid-block. This would promote a right-turn onto Main Street. The east side is proposed to be reduced by about 111 spaces. A 4-acre parcel would separate the parking lot from the residential neighborhood. The NCDA is looking at redesigning the entrance to the underpass instead of accessing an elevator and going straight FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25 2000 PAGE 13 down underneath the tracks. There would be a series of ramps and a certain slope. That would create a more friendly and open type of atmosphere to go underneath so people would be able to see to the other side and be able to come back up again. A sidewalk would be proposed on the west side and on the south side of Main Street. Ms. Dacy stated that on the west side there would be a parking area on the vacant lot that is there now, but there would be a smaller parking area to the northeast of that area. A detention pond would be located to the north, and a vegetative buffer would separate the pond to the residential area to the north. There would also be another buffer area on the west side. Ashton Avenue would still continue as the main drive through the parking area to access by 61 S` Way. The advantage of this is to slow down any type of traffic. This is a low volume street, but with the curves and turns, it would help to slow down the traffic. It would still enable people in that area to get to the stop light at 61 S` Way. Ms. Dacy stated that the staff analysis of the revised plan is that the rearrangement of the pazking spaces is a positive step. Staff suggested on the east side that the southerly driveway be made into a right turn only. Some issues need more attention. One is the drainage system for both of the sites. There is a pond proposed on the west side and another pond proposed on the east side to be located behind the Parson's Electric building. Staff suggested that runoff could possibly drain to a storm sewer at 61 S` Avenue and Main Street. The depth of that connection is very deep. There is a ten-foot difference in elevation. The engineers have not had a chance to determine this for sure yet. On the west side the public right-of-way section for Ashton Avenue is suggested to be some a public street. Metro Transit buses will not be stored overnight at tlus site. The major issue of whistles and horns is an issue that needs to be addressed. The issue of the rail crossing impacts have not been addressed as of yet. State Statute says that within 45 days of the hearing, the City shall approved or disapprove the location and design of the station to be located in the city or the town. The comments on the Advanced Corridor Plan according to that time frame need to be adopted by October 25. Then once they are submitted to the NCDA they will submit it to the Commissioner of Transportation according to State Statute. The NCDA has instituted another option of approving with conditions. In addition to the two statutory options the approval with conditions would be a third option. It states that they would get back to the cities in 45 days, which is policy by the NCDA board. Staffs recommendation is that Council receive any types of comments on the revised plan. Ms. Dacy stated that Mr. Tim Yantos is here from the NCDA, and may be able to give an update on other additional information. Until the comments have been assembled, staff suggested that action be postponed until October 9 on both of the items. Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that many comments have had to do with traffic through the Sylvan Hills area. One concern was that the park-and-ride would bring traffic through Sylvan Hills as a convenient way to get to Mississippi Street. He asked what the plans were for the 4-acre site. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25 2000 PAGE 14 Ms. Dacy stated that is an issue of what happens on the remaining parcel. It is partly addressed by the proposed station area plan language in the Comprehensive Plan. It does not specify land uses but suggests principles for the City to use when evaluating any type of development proposals. There is no proposal of the land use at this time. The site is zoned industrial right now. The Planning Commission asked if it was reasonable to have industrial at this corner. That is an issue for another hearing. One recommendation is for the City to direct staff to create an overlaying zoning district that would control development like any other type of zoning. Councilmember Billings stated that the entire piece on the east side of the track is owned by Nielson Investments. It is for sale. He said that we do not know right now if the NCDA or MnDOT will acquire the actual corner from Nielson Investments or allow Nielson Investments to do the development on that corner. Plans are not that far along. Councilmember Billings asked what the options for the City are at this point in time. State Statute provides that the City can disapprove the original plan and give a list of things we would like to see them do causing us to approve it. That will then go to the Commissioner of Transportation who determines if those changes are possible. The NCDA has instituted an internal policy that they will provide a situation for approval with conditions that is not in the State Statute. The new process is friendlier but not required by the Commissioner of Transportation. If it is not approved, the City would have to list the things that would cause it not to be approved by the Commissioner of Transportation. The NCDA is an organization that is not comprised of approximately thirty cities between downtown Minneapolis and St. Cloud that have been working collaboratively putting together a potential rail line from Minneapolis to St. Cloud. Councilmember Billings said "thank you " to the NCDA staff and their engineers, BRW, for listening to what the people said at the Planning Commission. Mr. Yantos, Project Director for the NCDA, stated that the length of time it takes for the train to pass through the grade crossings is as long for the crossing arms to go down and up. That was the untechnical answer. He said they will receive a technical one soon. Most trains that go through now are 100 cars in length. The proposed one would be three or four cars. The starting time for Stevenson Elementary will determine the traffic impacts for that school. The last train that comes through this area in the morning is at 8:10 a.m. so that would have a minimal impact if the school starts at 8:30. They hope to have about 98 percent efficiency on timing. The first train through in the evening is about 5:00 p.m. This would be after school has been let out. The whistles would not be blown at the station for neither the passenger nor freight trains, as is a practice by BNSF. As the train gets closer to the station, a bell would be rung so people axe alerted to get on. There are no statutes that provide that trains need to blow their whistle at a station. Mr. Yantos stated that the train is only there for about 45 seconds. The bell signals for people to get ready. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the bell was similar to a whistle. Mr. Yantos stated that it is a dinging bell. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25. 2000 PAGE 15 Mayor Jorgenson stated that 45 seconds is not very long for an elderly person or a disabled person to get on that train. Mr. Yantos stated that handicapped accessibility will be in the form of a platform set aside, and the person is able to get on. Once they are on and secured, the train leaves. He said that although 45 seconds seems short, trains across the country have shown that people are ready to get on and off. In each train, there are two doors to allow a lot of people on and off in a very short period of time. The 45 seconds allows the train to get to its next destination. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the long-term maintenance. Mr. Yantos stated that the service is maintained by MnDOT, as a recommendation of the NCDA. They would probably contract that out to someone else. Councilmember Billings stated that if someone was standing on the railroad track, the train or commuter rail would blow the whistle as a warning. Mr. Yantos stated that was correct. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that this would be a quick train. Waiting at the railroad crossings would not be an issue compared to the one hundred car trains that goes through. Mr. Yantos stated that was correct. Ms. Pauline Mewhorter, 39 - 62"d Way, stated that there is a very low traffic impact at this time on her street. There are probably only five cars that go down the street on a daily basis. There are probably only six homes. She has lived there for twenty years. If the traffic will be rerouted, she lives really close to where people would be coming out of a parking lot that has 355 spaces. The people parking there may just cut right straight through past her house. She might get light from the headlights along with the environmental impacts. She asked how she would get out of her driveway. She asked if there was going to be a bus route going through there, too. Ms. Dacy stated that the intent of this site plan was that the buses would come in on 615� Way. It was not intended for traffic in the pazk-and-ride area to go north, it was intended to retain a connection to the neighborhood to the north so people would still be able to drive down to 61St Way. The City does not want to encourage high speeds in that area. She thought that maybe the design is not typical of public streets. The vegetation planned would serve as a buffer to provide screening from headlights. Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that Mrs. Mewhorter does have a point that if you were parked there and you wanted to go back up to Mississippi Street, taking and right a left turn by her house to get to Mississippi Street would be an option. Ms. Dacy stated that there is an immediate and direct way to the East River Road from 61S` Way. Possibly, if people are going eastbound on Mississippi Street the motivation may be to avoid the traffic light. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 16 Ms. Mewhorter asked if this project was going to pay for the assessments, if any, for putting in new curbs and streets and drainage. Ms. Dacy stated that it is her understanding that it would not be Ms. Mewhorter's responsibility. Councilmember Billings asked if they would make the section immediately adjacent to the pond, one way going south. This would force people to use 61 st Way to East River Road cutting down on the amount of traffic and minimizing the amount of headlights shining in the window. Councilmember Wolfe asked what would happen if that intersection had a cul-de-sac. Councilmember Billings stated that the reason for having the street there is to get the people that live north of there and along Ashton Avenue and the people who live on 62"d Way, a way to come south through the parking lot in order to get to the signal at 61S` Way. Mr. John ivers, 5271 Trinity Drive, stated that the noise affected zones of the whistle blowing in the area is up to a one-half mile going well beyond University Avenue and East River Road. The noise level immediately adjacent, if a whistle is used, is actually above the normal sound level interfering with speech and television viewing. He strongly encouraged Council that the use of whistles not be a requirement. Councilmember Bolkcom thanked Mr. Ivers for the written materials he presented at the Planning Commission. Mr. Leonard Passon, 6211 Rainbow Drive, stated that he was encouraged by the no whistle solution. The east corridor is developing as rapidly as the west corridor. Right now Central Avenue handles about as much traffic as it can. He suspected that it would not be a year after the commuter train goes into operation that there would be another commuter train coming out the east. He thought the crossings on Osborne Road and 77`h and 85`h Avenues would be so busy that it would be almost impossible to go through there without having to stop for a train. Mr. Dale Warren, 6220 Jupiter Road, asked if a sound barrier behind the houses was in the plans. He noticed that since the trees have been taken down, he has experienced more noise when the trains come through. With a wall, the sound would go up, instead of going out. He asked if it was possible to make the 4-acres into a park area instead of having a drainage ditch with shrubbery and a pond to keep the noise from coming around into the area. He thought the wall would be the security for people who live there. He asked if there were future plans to have more than four cars coming on the train. Councilmember Billings stated that the platform itself is approximately 400 feet long. Mr. Yantos stated that each car is about 80 feet long. Mr. Warren asked if there were plans to add any more space there. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 17 Councilmember Billings stated that they are anticipating starting out with two and three cars per train and going to the four car limit. If they need more than four, they are looking at putting additional trains on the track. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the Environmental Impact Statement would be looking at all those noise barrier questions. Mr. Yantos stated that it does address the noise issue. The draft will be available within the next thirty days for public review. If all the items are not covered, additional information can be added. The noise has been a concern and has been reviewed. Mr. Dennis Johnson, 6336 Starlite Boulevard, stated that NCDA should have a noise wall on both the east and west side. At night he can hear the trains blowing the whistle since it is quite distinctive. He has an article off the Internet regarding the possible commuter rail system with the Bethel corridor. He asked how fast the freight trains would be traveling through Fridley. They will have to travel very fast with the commuter trains going through. Mr. Johnson said he thought he would have to pay for upgrades in the rail tracks with signaling through our taxes. The first time he heard ab"out the whistle was that it was a federal policy. The federal government is looking at changing the law in communities where they have no whistle. He wanted Council to make sure that this impact will be a positive one, and that Fridley will be a better place to live. He asked if there was going to be security in the tunnel underneath the tracks that is open 24 hours a day. Safety is his concern, and he wishes that the station azea would be built closer to I-694. He asked when the second tier was going to come through. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the vandalism as far as the bikeway/walkway is the light fixtures. Redoing the light fixtures will make it less of an issue. Mr. Passon stated that being along the railroad tracks, transients could come into the area especially in bad weather. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the reason the City cannot have a station by the railroad yard is because of the distance from the northtown yards. Councilmember Billings stated that the Northtown yaxds are the second busiest yards between Chicago and Seattle. They will not allow pedestrian traffic to be in that area. A train station is not allowed at any point south of where they start widening out for the yard. Ms. Dacy stated that the 24 hour issue is their suggestion to Council that staff submit that comment to the NCDA based on the fact that if the station is open from 6:OOa.m. to 6:00 p.m., it does provide the amount of time for people to use the underpass. Staff suggested that the NCDA investigate keeping that option open. The operational issue of keeping this open 24 hours is on the list for evaluation. Ms. Connie Metcalfe, 860 Moore Lake Drive, stated that she is curious why the parking lot on the east side is so far south. She thought the walk from the parking lot will be a long way. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000__ PAGE 18 Ms. Dacy stated that the distance is long, but the intent is to create somewhat of a buffer from the neighborhood to the north of 61 S` Avenue. This forces people to access the parking lot from Main Street as opposed to 61St Avenue. Ms. Metcalfe asked if the buffer area could be smaller to bring cars closer to the station. Ms. Dacy stated that could be an option. Staff is trying to suggest that by keeping this at four acres means that this is a substantial piece of acreage for an efficient design. Mr. Warren asked when people get out of their vehicle if there will be an enclosed platform for them. Ms. Dacy stated that there will be a sidewalk that will separate the tracks and the platform that will be out in the open. Mr. Warren asked if they could walk on the platform itself. Councilmember Billings stated that the platform is not covered at all. There will be an arched area that will be almost the entire length of the platform to provide shelter from the wind and rain. Ms. Dacy stated that there are bus shelters with a connection of the sidewalk to proceed to the platform. There is going to be enclosures where the ticket booths are. Mr. Warren asked if it was possible to have a security system with bars where people walk through and lock up at a certain time. Councilmember Billings stated that is contrary to providing a connection between the neighborhood on the east side of the tracks with the neighborhood on the west side. This provides an opportunity for the children who go to Stevenson School to take their bicycles and get underneath the railroad tracks to provide a safe connection to tie the neighborhoods together. He said that Council had requests from people on the west side of the tracks to work with MnDOT to provide a connection between Mississippi Street and I-694. Mr. Warren stated that he is asking if the gates would be closed and locked between midnight to 5:00 a.m. Councilmember Billings stated that the NCDA has indicated that is an operational feature. They are not sure they would be able to allow public access under there at all from 6:OOp.m. to 6:00 a.m. Mr. Bill Camp, 6280 University Avenue, stated that he saw no reason that the bell could not ring inside the cars to warn the people it is time to get off. He asked if something could be transmitted by receiver to start a bell ringing on the station proper and not have the dinging out in the public. It is a loud dinging. Nobody seems to want to show pictures of the Sylvan Hills neighborhood and how to control traffic coming off of Mississippi Street. In the past, the City FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25. 2000 PAGE 19 has closed the streets even to the residents because of the traffic before this rail proposal. Now nobody seems to care. Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that one of the reasons for leaving those four acres is that it prevents the traffic from going out to Sylvan Hills. Mr. Camp stated that the buffer does not change how the traffic will react coming off from the north. A better idea was the pond there. He is against putting the station there because two wonderful neighborhoods are being spoiled. Mr. Fred Harvey, 108 River Edge Way, asked what the total number of passengers for this rail is. Ms. Dacy stated that the projection is around 1400 people. Mr. Harvey stated that those on River Edge Way have a difficult time getting in and out on rush hour. Building the train station would make the situation worse. Councilmember-at-Large Barnette stated that these are going to be short periods of time of heavy traffic. Mr. Harvey stated that it is during that time that they already have problems getting in and out. Mayor Jorgenson stated that she thought there will be increased traffic in that area, but that intersection would probably become signalized to control the traffic flow. Mr. Harvey stated that it would be dangerous for children riding their bikes to school coming under that underpass to cross at East River Road. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table this item until October 9. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they could summarize any outstanding issues. Mayor Jorgenson stated that Mr. Yantos talked about MnDOT doing the maintenance on this property. She asked if the City is going to see the same type of maintenance they have seen on University Avenue and Highway 65 where they mow it twice per year. She said she was concerned about 61S` Way and the neighborhood traveling through the parking lot to go south on East River Road. She thought there might be a better way of trying to figure out how to accomplish that. She asked what the current zoning was on the parcel that is west of the tracks where the parking lot is proposed. Ms. Dacy stated that it is R-1, single family. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 20 Ms. Dacy stated that to summarize: the issues aze the traffic issues on the west side; and congestion and headlights. Mr. Yantos will satisfy the technical answer for the time of the railroad crossing. The whistle issue has been addressed. She did not know if the security or the central control facility question can be answered in 45 days. The pond location could be located on the south side or back toward 61 S` Avenue with additional landscaping. The drainage issue needs to be talked through with the NCDA engineers and the City engineers. A reference to the Bethel corridor for another commuter rail line will probably not be another route through Fridley. Staff also needs to firm up the time for the Stevenson School issue as well. Mr. Burns stated that the request for sound barriers is a big concern alsa Mr. Campbell expressed the idea of ringing the bells on the train and in station as opposed to out in the open. Ms. Dacy stated that the Environmental Impact hearings will be held this fall and are expected to be initiated in the next thirty days. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how the neighborhood would find out about this. She also asked if the meetings were going to be held near where they live. Mr. Yantos stated that they have used the Municipal Center Hall for several occasions and may want to do that for the EIS hearing. Mr. Burns asked Mr. Yantos if he had tried the Stevenson School for a hearing site because it may be more convenient. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the mailing list. Mr. Yantos stated that they would use the newspapers. Mayor Jorgenson asked if they would be held during the day or the evening. Mr. Yantos stated that they would be held in the evening. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there would be an opportunity for people to submit written letters and e-mail. Mr. Yantos stated that was correct. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there would be a summary after the hearing for the community. Mr. Yantos stated that was correct. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25. 2000 PAGE 21 11. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING A STATION AREA PLAN FOR THE NCDA COMMUTER RAIL STATION SITE: MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table this item until October 9. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. RESOLUTION NO. 85-2000 APPROVING A SUBDIVISION, LOT SPLIT, LS #00- 04, TO ESTABLISH A SIZE CONFORMING COMMERCIAL LOT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5943 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. (BY EARL WEIKLE & SONS AND VAN-O-LITE)(WARD 1): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that Van-O-Lite is proposing a new 7,400 square foot building just north of the existing Alano property. The request is to authorize the creation of a 24,570 square foot lot for Van-O-Lite and a 45,900 square foot lot for the Alano development. The Planning Commission recommended approval with twelve stipulations. Staff added an additional stipulation requiring payment of park fees when the building permit is issued. Staff recommended Council's approval. Councilmember Billings stated that in the past the Alano Society have shown a total disregard for the neighborhoods immediately to the east and for the stipulations of the special use permit requirements that have been requested of the Alano Society. They have shown a total disregard for building code requirements. Councilmember Billings would like to make sure that the City is completely and unequivocally confident that all the screening on the east side and drainage problems that exist are going to be corrected and that there will be no further problems in that area. Ms. Dacy stated that the Planning Commission has discussed the drainage and parking issue, and Mr. Paul Bolin, Planner, stated that the drainage issues were a problem in the past, but they have been addressed. The City will retain a performance bond if they are not. The Alano Society needs to concrete curb the north edge of their parking lot and are committed to doing that. Councilmember Billings asked if there was a screening fence along the east side of the property. Ms. Dacy stated that there is. It is a requirement that a screening fence go along the Van-O-Lite Property as well. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve the resolution with the following thirteen stipulations: 1) Traffic impacts from the park and ride site on the east side of the tracks need to be better addressed, and further investigation is warranted to address the following: a) Investigate the reduction of parking on the east side that is within a residential area versus the west side that is located in an industrial or transition area; b) Investigate separating the park and ride site on the east side from the neighborhood by pushing the park and ride lots further south in FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 PAGE 22 the site; c) Investigate different access modifications to deter traffic from cutting through the neighborhood including relocating driveways, restricted turning movements, installing appropriate signage (I.e. "No Through Traffic sign), or creation of inedians or other traffic calming improvements; d) The access driveway to the east park and ride lot should be shared with the remaining parcel; 2) The property dimensions of the site on the east side are not accurate and should reflect the land area immediately west of the Parson's Electric building; 3) The storm water management system should address the following comments: a) Underground ponding and treatments systems should be considered, especially for the west side of the railroad tracks; b) The pond on the east side should be relocated away from 61 S` Avenue and either located near the remaining developable parcel or located to the extreme southwest part of the parcel; c) A storm sewer system will have to be installed such that piping will have to extend from the new pond location to the southwest corner of the intersection at 61 St Avenue and Main Street;4) The park and ride facilities should be designed in accordance with typical parking and landscaping requirements found in the City's commercial and industrial zoning districts and in compatibility with the neighborhood; 5) NCDA must plat the property prior to installation of improvements; 6) On the west side of the tracks, consider increasing the amount of parking, while maintaining the Ashton Avenue street connection to 61S` Way. Further, consider the creation of "open space"/"trail stop resting" areas where the trail connects to the station area; 7) In order to address safety concerns, the NCDA should consider locating the "central control facility" security building for the Northstar system on the east park and ride lot. Further, building should be built large enough for another user that would provide a neighborhood/commuter customer service; 8) A pedestrian overpass connecting the two sites is essential. The City would prefer a facility, however, that is accessible 24 hours and contains a ramp underneath the tracks for bicyclists and pedestrian; 9) Provide pedestrian bikeway connections to all existing facilities; 10) Identify the impacts of the frequency of the commuter rail line at other at-grade crossings in Fridley, specifically at Osborne Road, 85�' Avenue and 77th Way; 11) Identify the potential traffic conflicts on the west side of the station with the timing of the arrival and departure of the school buses at Stevenson Elementary School; 12) Assurance that long-term maintenance of the facility be appropriately and properly operated; and 13) The petitioner shall pay the required park fees prior to the issuance of the building permit. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #00-21, BY EARL WEIKLE & SONS, TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED PARKING SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO 10 FEET, TO REDUCE THE 15 FOOT PLANTING STRIP TO 10 FEET, AND TO REDUCE THE PARKING STALL WIDTH FROM 10 FEET TO 9 FEET TO ALLOW TH� CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW COMMERCIAL BUILDING, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5943 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. (WARD ?): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that in order to build the proposed project for Van-O-Lite, three variances are requested. The Appeals Commission recommended approval of reducing the parking setback from 20 feet to 10 feet along the frontage road, and reducing the required 15 foot planting strip to 10 feet. The Appeals Commission however recommended denial of the variance FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 25 2000 PAGE 23 request on width of parking spaces for the west and south sides of the proposed project. They did recommend approval of a parking space width reduction from 10 feet to 9 feet on the east side of the project. The commission recommended seven stipulations. Councilmember Billings asked if the parking stall was only allowed to be reduced to nine feet on one side of the building. Ms. Dacy stated that was correct. It is Stipulation No. 7. Councilmember Billings asked if Stipulation No. 7 was supposed to read "nine" feet. Ms. Dacy stated that was correct. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve the Variance Request, VAR #00-21, with the following seven stipulations: 1) Approval is dependent upon lot split approval; 2) Petitioner responsible for any actions required to transfer fee title to the vacated alley. This action must be completed prior to issuance of any building permits due to the fact that the lot is substandard in size without inclusion of the vacated alleyway; 3) Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction; 4) A landscape plan meeting all code requirements for number of, size of any building permits; 5) Petitioner shall provide code required number of parking stalls; 6) Storm pond must meet approval of City engineering staff; and 7) the nine-foot designated stalls shall have a sign for employee parking only. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER-AT-LARGE BARNETTE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Councilmember Wolfe urged all residents to check both sides of a petition issue before signing. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE SEPTEMBER 25, 2000, CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:31 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Signe L. Johnson Nancy J. Jorgenson Recording Secretary Mayor CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the September 20, 2000, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Diane Savage, Barbara Johns, Dean Saba, Dave Kondrick, Leroy Oquist Members Absent: Larry Kuechle, Connie Modig Others Present: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Barbara Parcells, 5641-6�' St. N.E. Colleen and Gary O'Malley, 7432 Bacon Drive Ken and Carol Hughes, 6424 Ashton Avenue Dave Meissner, 5790 Jefferson St. James Driessen, Medtronic Representative Joseph Krumpelmann, HGA Inc. Mike Riehgels, Vanman Companies Lawrence J. Coleman, Qwest Wireless, LLC David Mitchell, Qwest Wireless, LLC Linda Fisher, 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza Brandon Johnson, APT Mlnneapolis APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 6 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the September 6, 2000, Flanning Commission meeting minutes as presented. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Redevelopment District Project Plan Approval, MP #00-01, by James Driessen, Medtronic, to construct a new child care center, generally located at the corner of Medtronic Parkway and 7th Street on the Lake Pointe Campus. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to open the public hearing UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:32 P.M. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 2 Ms. Dacy stated that Medtronic is requesting the construction of a free-standing daycare facility for its employees at its new world headquarters campus at the northwest corner of Highway 65 and I-694. The original master plan anticipated this use, but at that time it was planned to be located within a building. The proposed amendment is to locate this 11,270 square foot facility at the northwest corner of the campus site. The property is zoned S-2 redevelopment district requiring a site plan review by the Planning Commission and the City CounciL Ms. Dacy stated that the change is due to safety and design issues by locating the daycare within a building. The building code has a number of restrictions when it comes to a daycare facility. It is known as an E type of occupancy and there were a number of requirements for exiting and separation from other uses in the building. The site plan proposes a facility to hold up to 120 children, ages infant through preschool. The building setback is consistent with other commercial standards and about 35 feet from the property line. Each part of the daycare facility has an exit to the outdoors. The play areas are to be contained by fencing. This facility would be for Medtronic employees only including the employees at the cardiology campus at the Rice Creek facility. The site plan proposes a ten space drop-off area and a surface parking lot for the staff. Eventually the surface parking lot will become part of the future ramp. The driveways to the site are about 180 feet from the intersection so they are well spaced away from that intersection. The exterior of the building is a one-story building matching what is under construction now. The traffic created from the facility was anticipated by the original analysis that was done as part of the campus project. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Master Plan Amendment and Project Plan Review to the City Council. Mr. Kondrick asked if you can to look down at the top of the building when traveling past the building on I-694? If so, would you be able to see the mechanicals? If you can, is it possible to screen that from view? Ms. Dacy stated that you probably would be able to see the rooftop of the building going westbound. The height of the buildings from Phase 1 may block that out for awhile. It may be that by the time they get past Phase 1, you could see that. The petitioner did a rooftop equipment analysis for sight of the rooftop equipment from the Medtronic Parkway and across the 7�' Street right-of-way. Because of the height of the parapet walls and location of the equipment in the center of the building, it will not be visible from these two vantage points. There is not much they can do regarding the I-694 issue. Mr. Kondrick stated it is disappointing to see sheet metal there. Ms. Dacy stated this is a small facility compared to what was presented two or three years ago. Mr. Kondrick stated that even beautifying this by using the same colors to match would be good. Ms. Savage asked Ms. Dacy if she had heard any objections from the public. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 3 Ms. Dacy stated that one resident who lives on 6�' Street on the west side was very concerned about the traffic impacts. The petitioner, Jim Driessen, Medtronic Representative, stated he did not have much to add to staff's comments. Ms. Savage asked if Mr. Driessen had any answer to Mr. Kondrick's concerns. Mr. Driessen stated that they are also concerned about that. There will be finro units spaced on opposite sides because there are preschool children on one end and infants on the other end. They are extending the parapet walls out to screen. Mr. Driessen stated they are anxious to get going and would like to get children in there as soon as possible. Barbara Parcells, 5641 6�' Street, stated that she is the one who called Ms. Dacy regarding the traffic impacts. The first time they closed 7th Street to do some work there, she noticed a major increase of traffic down 6th Street. There will be other cars added to that around the area. She feels her neighborhood is isolated and this will add some traffic. If she wants to go down the end of her street and make a left turn on 57tn, she will be stuck there for awhile. They will leave going towards Central and University. If she wanted to go up to 7�' and take a left and go towards Mississippi or go down to 57th, she will be delayed quite a bit. The sound from I-694 is really loud, and she does not believe the children will hear anything while they are outside. People will hear the background noise on her telephone inside her house sometimes from the traffic on I- 694. Major sound barriers might help. Mr. Saba stated that he knows what she is saying about the traffic. It is hard to turn left onto 7th Street from eastbound 57'h Avenue. Once these facilities are in, is there a way to address this traffic problem? Ms. Dacy stated that the traffic analysis study showed that when they are anticipating trips to the campus, they did a little analysis of the existing employees as a rule of thumb to try to gage the directional distribution. There is about 15 percent (15%) potentially that could come down UniVersity Avenue, twenty percent on Highway 65, and 3% from a local perspective on 7�' Street. There are employees that live in the community now north of the campus. There is about an equal split off of I-694 with 20% from the east and 25°/a from the west. There is a small percentage from the south of I- 694. When you add up the percentages, there is almost a fifty-fifty split in terms of west and east. Because of the movement going into the site in the morning off University and 57th Avenue and turning southbound on 7th Street, the AUAR suggested that a right turn lane at that location would allow enough right-of-way to do that. Then exiting in the afternoon from Medtronic Parkway onto 7th street and making a left hand turn is not ideal. There are three streets there with 57th Avenue and a short amount of distance. They were concerned about the cars, but the good news is there is a stop sign there right now that will slow down traffic. A left turn lane on 7th Street could be created for the left turn movement going westbound on 57th northbound on 7th Street. That is an attempt to separate the tra�c into the appropriate lanes. �� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 4 Mr. Saba asked if it would make sense to put in a traffic light at 57�' Avenue and 7�' Street. Ms. Dacy stated that it is busy, but the volumes are not high enough to require a traffic light. Mr. Saba stated that it is not the volumes as much as the blind corner to make a left hand turn onto northbound 7�' Street. Ms. Savage stated that the traffic reports indicate that the traffic patterns would be the same for the daycare center whether it would be within the building or in a separate building. Mike Chevrette, 510 57th Avenue, stated he lives right behind the proposed facility. He is concerned about the increased traffic. The intersection is not conducive to traffic management because of all through streets and various ways you could go. They were told at the beginning that this was a three stage projecf. The first stage would not come into being until ten years from now and the parking ramp would come down at that end and traffic could be better addressed at that time. The daycare center is speeding up this time table as far as increased traffic from the west. The end of the lot does not have much sod. The southerly winds have turned his house into a dustbowl. When they do put in the daycare center, he hopes that the final landscaping will reduce the dust. Where will the parking ramp be? How far from 7�' Street will it be set to the east? Ms. Dacy stated that the ramp will come down and enclose or remove the existing surface lot along the west edge. It would be about 200 feet back from 7th Street. Mr. Chevrette asked for an estimate on how far the daycare center would be from the back of his house. Ms. Dacy stated that it is between 40-50 feet from the lot line to the right-of-way edge of ___ Medtronic Parkway. The parkway right-of-way is about 100 feet and then another 35 feet from his lot line. Mr. Chevrette asked if the playground area will be along the side of the building. Ms. Dacy stated they are proposing the play areas to be on all sides of the building because the building is divided for the different ages. Mr. Driessen stated that the daycare would operate from 6:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Ms. Johns asked if there was a fence around the front play area. Mr. Driessen stated that a more decorative wall will be on the north side. Ms. Johns asked if there was other fencing around the Medtronic area and would it match? 0 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 5 Mr. Driessen stated that there is and it will match. There is fencing all around the three playgrounds. Mr. Kondrick asked how tall the building will be. Mr. Driessen stated that it would be around 15.4 inches with one area being two to three feet higher. Mr. Kondrick asked if Medtronic knows how many of the 120 children will be at this location and how many at the other location. Mr. Driessen stated that the convenience will be easier for people who live on that side. Phase 1 has 1,000 employees so it is adding anywhere from 50 cars to 1,000 cars. He does not believe the daycare will be the major contributor to traffic problems. Ms. Johns asked if the daycare was proposed to be in the building that is currently under construction? Mr. Driessen stated that it was considered to be in the Commons building which is under construction right now. They are doing fairly extensive landscaping in and around the playground and building. There will be a lot of trees and shrubs. Ms. Johns asked if the parking ramp will it be accessible for the daycare facility. Mr. Driessen stated that the drop-off will remain the same, but staff will park in the ramp. MOTION by Mr. Oquist to close the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. Saba. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:05 P.M. Mr. Oquist stated that it seems pretty well put together and a daycare center was going to be there to begin with. Mr. Saba stated that he likes the daycare center. The traffic situation is bad now and traffic will really get bad in that area. Mr. Oquist stated that the traffic of the whole facility is something they need to monitor and put in stop lights or turn lanes. Mr. Kondrick stated that he likes the landscaping plan. Ms. Johns agreed. Mr. Oquist stated that Medtronic staff should probably look at the concern about the dust. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to approve MP #00-01 with the following stipulations: 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 6 1. Utility connections to 7�' Street shall be made by November 15, 2000. 2. The dumpster shall be fully screened. 3. The petitioner shall comply with all applicable licensing requirements. 4. A performance bond for the parking, landscaping, and irrigation improvements shall be submitted in conjunction with the building permit. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Savage stated this item will go to City Council on October 9. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #00-10, by Vanman Companies Architects and Builde�s, Inc., to build an addition to an existing church building within a residential district, generally located at 61 Mississippi Way (Redeemer Lutheran Church). MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Johns, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:09 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated that Redeemer Lutheran Church is requesting a special use permit to allow the expansion of platform storage and entry areas at their facility. The church is planning to build these different facilities in two phases. Phase 1 will be a platform storage area on the west end of the building. Phase 2 will be an entry space containing offices and meeting rooms located in an existing alcove on the architecture of the building west of the current worship space. R-1 single family residential, zoning is to the north and west and south. P, public open space, a park is located to the east. Mr. Hickok stated the alcove will be the area for the entry space in Phase 2 of the proposal to tie the architecture together with similar materials of Phase 1. There is an existing multi-purpose space/gymnasium. The equipment would be in the area where people gather now, and there is no separation to fully utilize the space. This would allow the space for activities, storage, equipment, and a place to fully utilize the multi- purpose space. Mr. Hickok stated that the original church is stucco with a stone base. The lot was platted in 1959. There was a building addition in 1963. In 1984, a special use permit was required for additions to churches in a residential district. Special use permits were granted for addition in 1984 and 1986. Staff recommends approval of the special use permit. Churches are permitted by special use in an R-1 zoning district. The expansion of the Redeemer Church complies with the special use requirements subject to stipulations. There is a buffer on the north side of the church somewhat in the landscaped area. It is residential on that north side. There is a buffer on the west side also. Mr. Kondrick asked if the number of parking spaces will be affected. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 7 Mr. Hickok stated there are 249 parking stalls proposed, and the code formula requires 133 parking spaces. Mr. Kondrick asked if there were limitations to the number of square feet that they can build onto this property. Mr. Hickok stated that they are well within that. Their site is 4.72 acres. In the R-1 district you can build up to twenty-five percent (25%) of the lot. Ms. Johns asked if the buffer on the west side will remain. Mr. Hickok stated that the buffer is intended to remain intact. The purpose of the addition is to not add people or demands for parking that will push it out further but to create this alcove space inside the building utilized for storage and other activities. Mr. Oquist asked if there are any stipulations on the SP #84-08 that need to be carried over to this one. Mr. Hickok stated there was discussion regarding parking of the bus. Code administration has resolved this issue since the 1984 special use permit. The petitioner, Mike Riehgels, Vanman Companies Representative, stated that he does not have anything to add and no problem with the stipulations. Mr. Oquist asked if the platform is a stage. Mr. Riehgels stated that they cannot call it a stage because of building code and issues. It will be used for theatrical performances and a band. Equipment and props will be placed there also. Mr. Oquist asked if the addition will be sufficiently insulated so the noise will not move to the outside. Mr. Riehgels stated that it will be similar construction to what is there right now. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:18 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to recommend approval of SP #00- 10 with the following stipulations: 1. City Staff shall review and approve masonry product to be used on the Phase 1 exterior expansion. 2. All necessary permits must be obtained prior to beginning construction. 3. Redeemer Lutheran Church must accommodate all of its parking needs on its own site. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 8 4. Special Use Permit SP #84-08 shall be replaced by Special Use Permit SP #00-10. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Hickok stated that this will go to Council on October 9. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat, PS #00-02, by Richard T. Brickner to create two lots, generally located at 74402 Bacon Drive NE. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick to open the public hearing. Seconded by Ms. Johns. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:19 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated that Brickner Builders is requesting a preliminary plat to replat the property located at 7440 Bacon Drive into two single family lots. In R-1 zoning, Fridley Code requires a minimum lot width of 75 feet for a subdivision, with a minimum lot area of 9,000 square feet. The proposed Lot 1 will be 94 feet wide and 12,530 square feet in size after the replat. An eighty-foot lot width is required in a subdivision ordinance on a corner lot. They will be in excess of that with 94 feet on Lot 1. The petitioners propose a 76 foot width for the second lot with a lot size of 10,127 square feet. Mr. Hickok stated the property is located north of 73�d and Onondaga at the corner. A residential structure was built there in 1949 and was recently demolished to make way for the subdivision. The debris from the deconstruction needs to leave the site before the sites are put up for sale. The majority of the debris has been removed. Flanery Park is across the street on the east side. R-1 single family residential, surrounds the property on all sides. Two single family homes will be facing Flannery Park. Staff recommends approval with stipulations. Mr. Oquist asked if there are any wells or septic systems. � Mr. Hickok stated they are not aware of any, but that will be the responsibility of the owner to give verification. � The petitioner, Mark Brickner, Brickner Builders, stated that he did not have any problem with the stipulations. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to close the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:26 P.M. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend approval of PS #00- 02 with the following stipulations: : PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 9 1. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Any remaining debris from demolition of existing home and any brush piles on site shall be removed prior to granting of final plat. 3. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the. issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties. 4. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. The petitioner shall pay $750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. The petitioner shall pay all water and sewer connection fees. 8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 9. The petitioner shall provide a 12 foot drainage and utility easement along the westerly property line of proposed Lots 1& 2. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVQGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Savage stated that this will go to City Council on October 9. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-02, by Qwest Wireless, LLC, to add approved site for the installation of towers or wireless telecommunications facilities, generally located in the right-of-way of 1200 Cheri Lane. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to open the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. Saba. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 8:26 P.M. Ms. Dacy stated Qwest is proposing to install a cylindrical antenna on top of an NSP pole within the Cheri Lane right-of-way just north of Menards. They are proposing to remove the existing pole and install a new wood pole with the antenna on top of that facility. They are also proposing to have the above ground equipment. This process is established in the O-5 regulations to create an approved site. These types of facilities are a permitted use. The City identified 8-10 sites for providers to install their facilities. This process is the same as a rezoning process. The ordinance has established a number of criteria. Ms. Dacy stated that the existing facility in St. Paul on Larpenter shows a panel design type of antenna. They are proposing a cylindrical design at the top of the pole. A cable runs up the side of the pole to reach the antenna on top. This application has a number of pros and cons. They are proposing to collocate and meet the intent of the ordinance. It is two different types of utilities with the antenna on top and the wood pole that is there right now. They would lease the space on that pole from NSP. It is a shorter � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 10 facility at 40-45 feet in height. The design is less intrusive. The petitioner did a good job of analyzing and meeting the criteria. The application represents the next phase in the wireless employment. The City will see a lot more poles and shorter poles in the right-of-way in the future. The demand is increasing with the services offered. Shorter is better; however, there will be more of them. The technology is getting smaller, and they still need the ground equipment which adds more clutter in the right-of-way. The monopoles are already predesigned for at least three facilities. Ms. Dacy stated staff feels the petitioner has met a majority of the criteria; however, staff feels that the equipment must be camouflaged as much as possible to minimize the intrusion. Staff is suggesting that the ground equipment be installed below grade. As a result of this, the petitioner needs to obtain a right-of-way permit and submit a copy of the Joint Use Agreement with NSP and that no additional antennae may be installed unless its equipment can be installed below grade. The petitioner sent two letters regarding that stipulation. Ms. Dacy stated that staff is going to maintain the recommendation for below grade. The petitioner points out a legal issue. The City Attorney verified that the City is proper in making this type of recommendation. She is not prepared to go through the legal issues, and what is before the Commission tonight is the zoning issue and the policy issue. This is the wave of the future and is a rezoning action and not a right-of-way issue. Mr. Oquist stated that with the brown equipment, they looked very similar. Are there two sets of antennas? Ms. Dacy stated that plan is for the typical ground equipment and then there is another planned cabinet for expansion which is a small facility. Mr. Oquist stated that landscaping would be all around it. Ms. Dacy stated that it is a wide open expanse. The petitioners asked what size species they should install, and staff suggested a six foot Arbor Vitae. They are proposing seven of those along with a five foot Arbor Vitae which would grow to an eight foot tall mature size and the rest would get to thirteen feet. Mr. Saba asked about plans for maintaining the landscape. Ms. Dacy stated that this is associated with their facility and they will be responsible to maintain the landscape. Mr. Kondrick asked if they have to put concrete poles around the equipment for protection from vehicles. Ms. Johns asked if he meant poles that are similar to bollards. Ms. Dacy stated there are no bollards. This is a local right-of-way. Mr. Oquist stated that they seem to be painted white or aluminum. 10 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 11 Ms. Dacy stated that the MnDOT equipment is painted brown, but there are issues with the types of the metal and how the paint is anodized to that. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the two letters addressed to staff by Qwest dated September 18 and 20, 2000. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Johns asked why they would have an expansion on the equipment if there is not going to be an expansion on the pole. Ms. Dacy stated that they could add another "unipac" design or facility. She is not sure about the size of that though. The recommendation of no additional antennas means that this would be for the proposed cylinder and the one additional installation. The petitioner, Larry Coleman, Qwest Wireless, LLC, stated that City staff has been very good to work with. They have over 400 sites in Minnesota and over 3,000 sites system-wide. They do not have one that is underground. It is feasible but not practical. They are not aware of any other characters with underground equipment and feel that it is a requirement other communities have suggested, but they have always come to the conclusion that there are better ways to go about it. Those reasons are installation of underground equipment requires a certain amount of atmosphere and also drainage. They would have to install that into a vault with a big sump pump and ventilation equipment. This would be similar ta a housing air conditioning unit being placed above the vault. This would end up with a large surface area quite a bit larger than the equipment. Ms. Savage asked Mr. Coleman if the ground equipment is larger. Mr. Coleman stated, yes, the ground equipment at Matterhorn is about five times the size of theirs. The equipment is about 2.5 x 9 feet which is relatively small. They have incorporated landscaping into the designs, keeping the landscape within the right-of- way. They would be able to match the browns of the MnDOT equipment. They need a sun shield or heat field which would increase the height of the equipment by one inch. Mr. Oquist stated that could be something they could look at. Mr. Coleman stated that was correct. Ms. Savage asked how they felt regarding the additional stipulation regarding the antennas. Mr. Coleman stated that it looks like a single cylinder, but is actually three and a half times as long to get the full 360 degrees coverage. They are currently at three of the approved sites in Fridley, but have a gap at the intersection of I-694 which is why they need to be in the immediate proximity there. � 11 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 12 Mr. Kondrick asked if the one pole at the top would have three more cylinders in the future. Mr. Coleman stated that they would not be able to do three more, but they could have an additional unipac above theirs. Their expansion cabinet is if they had a frequency or additional ground equipment, it is already built in there. Ms. Johns asked if the unipac is the same color as the pole. Mr. Coleman stated they do not really have a wood covering, but it would match the ground equipment. Their particular concern is the underground requirement. Besides the legal issues, this is a practical matter. This causes them to increase the footprint of the equipment, and they still have to be above ground with the ventilation equipment. Mr. Kondrick asked if the equipment was vandalproof. Mr. Coleman stated it is vandalproof and weatherproof. Mr. Oquist stated that it looks like the pole is within the landscaped area. Mr. Coleman stated that is correct. They have numerous installations with NSP, and the unipac design on Larpenter in St. Paul is an older design with the three panels. Now there is a more sleek design. They would appreciate consideration to remove this stipulation. They would stipulate that the coloring of the cabinets match the MnDOT equipment. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to close the public hearing. Seconded by Mr. Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:53 P.M. Mr. Kondrick stated he understands staff's position to keep everything out of the way, but with the landscaping and everything else, he thinks it is a hardship. Mr. Oquist stated it would be nice to have it underground. To do that, it has to go into a vault and be ventilated. This would also increase the footprint and make that area larger. Making it larger would probably be less effective with the landscaping. Mr. Kondrick asked if the building that looked like it might fall over was still on the site. Ms. Dacy stated that was gone. Ms. Savage asked if there were any complaints regarding this. Ms. Dacy stated that Mr. Hickok received a call from a gentleman at Menards. Mr. Hickok stated Menards did not want this to block the electrical display through those windows and wanted to make certain this would not block the advantage they feel they 12 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 13 have along that side. Staff evaluated that, and the trees are low enough from a highway vantage point that it is not going to impact Menards' electrical display. Ms. Savage agreed that the landscaping will essentially cover it, and she does not see that there is much of a need for underground equipment. Ms. Johns stated that she thinks that there is a little validity to it because as time goes on the electronic world will become more prevalent. There will be more and more people coming to the City stating that they need poles and each are going to come with a bunch of equipment. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend approval ZTA #00-02, by Qwest Wireless, LLC, with the following stipulations: 1. The ground equipment shafl be installed above grade with the vegetation proposed in the landscaping plan, and the landscaping shall be maintained by the petitioner. 2. Ground equipment and the cylinder on top of the pole shall be colored brown to match the MnDOT equipment. 3. The petitioner shall submit a copy of the joint use agreement with NSP to the City prior to the installation of the service. 4. No additional antenna may be installed on the subject NSP pole other than the two antennas proposed in the application. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Dacy stated that this item will go to City Council on October 9. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #00-09, by APT Minneapolis, Inc., for the installation and operation of a wireless telecommunications tower, generally located at 7900 Beech Street NE. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Johns, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 9:00 P.M. Mr. Kondrick stated that American Portable Telecom is requesting a special use permit to allow the construction of a 120 foot telecommunications tower on the property owned by Richard Carlson at 7900 Beech Street. A 59 foot by 59 foot fence compound will also be required as part of this proposal. This is the earlier type of telecommunications equipment. It is a monopole which can be up to 125 feet in height and designed to have collocation opportunities also up to three users. Code requires a special use permit to allow telecommunications towers and wireless telecommunications facilities in industrially zoned districts. The property is located in an industrial area north of 79�' east of the rail line, other industrial and S-1 single family residential. To the north is M- 3, heavy industrial outdoor intensive and also to the east. 13 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 14 Mr. Kondrick stated that the entrance from Beech Street already exists and would provide access for the new facility. After analyzing the request, staff recommends the special use permit be approved with stipulations. Mr. Kondrick asked if the height of this pole was because APT has old equipment? Mr. Hickok stated this is the master location to help get coverage of an area quickly. Mr. Kondrick asked if one tall pole will take the place of three short poles. Mr. Hickok stated that it will complement it. This gives them the broader circles used to figure their coverage areas. They then refine that by complementing that with the smaller technologies in the right-of-ways. Ms. Dacy stated that it deals with the capacity. The more users, the more use they will need of the pole. There are more people on the roadways using cell phones. Mr. Kondrick stated that he hates to see a 120 foot pole anywhere. Mr. Hickok stated they encouraged folks to gravitate to the T-2 technology early on. It is conceivable that by a thorough coverage of the smaller poles early on, some taller poles may have been eliminated. The petitioner's representative, Linda Fisher, 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza, stated that they attended the Development Review Committee meeting with City staff. A representative for Nextel Communications, a competitor of Qwest, stated technology depends on the individual carriers as to innovation, size of the pole, etc. He supports both proposals. Mr. Kondrick asked him if he understood his interest in why the pole has to be 120 feet talL The Nextel representative stated that relates to the technologies being used. Nextel with a 60 foot elevation with their technology being used would be of much benefit to them with a small specific coverage area. Depending on any new information of any poles, there may be a collocation request shortly for Nextel to collocate next time on any new poles. The City is accomplishing what they want to accomplish. This is a taller facility and the next available facility on a 120 foot pole would probably be at 100 feet. Depending on where our coverage areas are, they may have a need for that facility. Mr. Kondrick asked Ms. Fisher if her company could get by with a 60 foot tower. Ms. Fisher stated that she is the lawyer representing the company. It is her understanding that it does in part relate to the technology being used the coverage objectives and the height. Mr. Brandon Johnson, frequency engineer for APT, stated that a 60 foot pole would require multiple poles for the coverage they need. 14 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 15 The Nextel representative stated that would be much the same scenario for Nextel. If there were a dozen poles in the proximity instead of a 120 foot pole with finro carriers, it would be a problem. Mr. Oquist stated that it provides for less poles in one area. MOTION 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 WAS CLOSED AT 9:15 P.M. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend approval of SP #00- 09 with the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner or successors shall install and maintain the proposed equipment so that it blends into the surrounding environment. 2. A non-corrosive finish shall be used to paint the pole an "eggshell" white. 3. The tower shall not be artificially illuminated except as required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 4. All screening plantings shall be installed in accordance with the landscape plan, dated July 21, 2000, submitted by APT. 5. The facility shall be designed to discourage unauthorized entry. 6. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of installation of any facility equipment on this site. 7. No signs other than warning or equipment information signs are permitted as part of this application. 8. Any future placement of antennae on the tower shall require review by the City to determine if the equipment location requires additional stipulations or a revised special use permit. 9. The petitioner shall utilize existing drive, any new drives to be created need to be paved in accordance with City Code. 10. No barbed wire shall be used on the fence surrounding this structure. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS 6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 15 2000 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the August 15, 2000, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 15 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, SEPTEMBER 20, 2000 PAGE 16 7. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 17 2000. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive the August 17, 2000, Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 23 2 000 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the August 23, 2000, Appeals Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 7 2000 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Johns, to receive the August 7, 2000, Parks and Recreation Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2000, PLANNING COMMISSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:23 P.M. RespectFully submitted, � � ��J Sig L. Johns Recording Secretary _ 16 : AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CfTY OF FRIDLEY Date: 10/4/00 ,�` i�d' To: William W. Burns, Ciry Manager ,�(� � From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Re: Master Plan Amendment and Project Plan Approval in a S-2, Redevelopment District PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission at its September 20, 2000 meeting unanimously recommended approval of MPA #00-01 for the construction of a 11,270 square foot free standing day care center on the Medtronic Inc. World Headquarters campus subject to the following four stipulations: 1. Utility connections to 7`h Street shall be made by November 15, 2000. 2. The dumpster shall be fully screened. 3. The petitioner shall comply with all applicable licensing requirements. 4. A performance bond for the parking, landscaping, and irrigation improvements shall be submitted in conjunction with the building permit. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council concur with the Planning Commission recommendation. : � ":�I M-00-167 17 City of Fridley Land Use Application MPA #00-01 September 15, 2000 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Medtronic Inc. 3850 Victoria Street Shoreview, MN 55126 Requested Action: Master Plan Amendment and Project Plan Approval in a S-2, Redevelopment District Purpose: To construct a free standing day care center for Medtronic employees Fxisting Zorung: S-2, Redevelopment District General Locations: Southeast corner of Medtronic Parkway and 7`n Street Size: Part of total campus; 45 acres Existing Land Use: Corporate Headquarters Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: R-1, Single family E: S-2, Corporate Hqtrs S: I-694 W: Single and Multiple Family Comprehensive Plan Conformance:-- Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: The S-2 District requires that all projects proposed in the district receive "project plan approval". The free standing day care is also a change in the approved Master Plan. Legal Description of Property: Fridley Executive Center Outlot A& Outlot B. Transportation: The day care will derive access solely from Medtronic Parkway. Physical Characteristics: Area has been graded by Medtronic as part of construction. SUMMARY OF PROJECT During the building plan analysis of the Phase I construction, it was deternvned that the day care facility could not be accomadated within the proposed buildings. A free standing facility at the northwest corner of the site is the proposed location. STAFF RECONIlVIENDATION City Staff recommends approval of the Master Plan Amendment and project plan with stipulations. CITY COUNCIL ACTION �� October 9, 2000 60 DAY DATE October 17, 2000 Staff Report Prepared by: Barbara Dacy MASTER PLAN AND PROJECT PLAN #00-01 Back�round The City Council approved the Master Plan for the Medtronic World Headquarters on Apri126, 1999. The Master Plan approved the construction of up to 1,600,000 square feet of corporate facilities and three parking ramps. The first phase consists of approximately 500,000 square feet and is nearing completion. Six buildings are under construction including a research building, education building, corporate headquarters building, neurological building, a campus commons building, and a central plant facility. A 1,000 car pazking ramp is also under construction. During the preparation of final building plans, Medtronic was plannuig to locate a day care center within the "campus commons" building. This building provides a variety of services for the employees. Unfortunately, it was deternuned that the location of the day care center in conjunction with the other uses of the campus commons building would pose too many conflicts with the building code requirements. It was not possible to provide the appropriate area separarion walls and fire exiting required for a day care facility. Legal Basis for Review Medtronic is requesting approval of a Master Plan amendment to locate a free-standing day care center in the northwest part of the site. Second, the S-2 Redevelopment District requires that the Planning Commission and City Council approved the "project plan" or site plan for each project within the district. Because the master plan is to be amended, Medtronic is required to submit the projecdsite plan for review and approval. Proposed Construction The day care facility is proposed to be located in the northwest part of the campus near the southeast corner of the Medtronic Parkway and 7`h Street intersection. The building will be 11,270 square feet and will be licensed for up to 120 children, from infant to pre-school age. The facility will be for Medtronic employees only. It is anticipated that employees from both the existing campus at Rice Creek and the new campus will use this facility. The parking area includes a 10 space drop off area just to the east of the main entrance to the facility. A covered wallcway will be constructed between the entrance and the drop off area. The westernmost driveway on Medtronic Parkway is about 180 feet from the 7"' Street intersection. The easternmost driveway is opposite a break in the median in the parkway and will provide full movement access for cars exiting the site. The distance from the 7`h Street is adequate to handle cars entering the site from the west. 19 A 34space parking lot is proposed to serve the facility. About 30 staff people will be working at the facility. The parking area proposed at this time is a surface lot. In future phases, the lot will be removed and the area would become part of the proposed parking ramp. Staff members would then park in the ramp. The original Master Plan did not show any construction in this particular area except for a futlue Paz'�g �P• The play areas are located on the north and south sides of the building and will be fully enclosed by fencingJwalls. The engineering staff has reviewed the plans and the storm water plan and calcularions are satisfactory. The utility connections in 7`h Street need to be completed by November 15, 2000 so that the asphalt patch can be completed by winter. Medtronic intends to begin construction on the facility as soon as possible in October so that it coincides as close as possible to the opening of the campus facilities. The exterior of the building will match the architectLUe of the existing buildings under const�uction and will use the same materials. Traffic One resident called and was concemed by traffic impacts from the day care facility. The h�ic analysis that was completed by Medtronic during the review process used a campus size of 1,600,000 square feet and 20-year projections. Because the day care facility is an employee used only facility, there will not be additional trips other than the trips created by Medtronic employees from the Rice Creek facility. Many families base their day care decision on where the day care is located for the "trip home". It is hard to predict exactly how many will enter from 7`h Street or TH 65, but even with an even split of traffic, the day care center alone will not cause any adverse traffic impacts. The day care traffic was fully anticipated in the original traffic analysis. The same traffic pattems would occur even if the day care facility were to be located within the buildings. Staff Recommendation City Staff recommends approval of the Master Plan Amendment and Project Plan based on the plans contained in this application with the following stipulations: 1. Utility connections to 7`h Street shall be made by November 15, 2000. 2. The dumpster shall be fully screened. 3. The petitioner sha11 comply with all applicable licensing requirements. 4. A performance bond for the parking, landscaping, and irrigation improvements shall be submitted in conjunction with the building pemut ri•J � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 cmr oF FRIDLEY DATE: October 5, 2000 TO: Wiliiam W. Burns, City Manager 1�1�� t�� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development D'uector Paul Bolin, Planner Scott J. Hickok, Planning Coordinator �� Special Use Permit, SP-00-10, Redeemer Lutheran Church INTRODUCTION On September 20, 2000, the Planning Commission considered Special Use Permit, SP-00-10, by Vanman Company, Architecture, regarding Redeemer Lutheran Church. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of SP-00-10, with 4 stipulations. SUMMARY OF REQUEST Redeemer Church has planned a two-phase expansion of the footprint of their existing church. The first phase is the construction of a stage/platform at the west end of their existing gymnasium (west edge of entire complex). The fust phase is planned for construction this fall and will allow expanded storage and performance space for activities that presently occur in the facility. The second phase will consist of the construction of a new church entrance, gathering space, and offices, in the existing "internal alcove" created by the churches u-shaped configuration. The purpose of both phases of expansion is to allow the church to better utilize the internal space within the complex. At this time, no addirional church programming is proposed as a result of the added space. The pazking spaces that exist on site exceed the number of stalls required according to the Church formula defined by Code. However, staff has observed the church has a Wednesday moming event each week that causes their parking lot to over-flow. 1'his is not directly related to the expansion; however, staff will be meeting with Church officials to address this issue prior to Monday evening's meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of SP-00-10, with 4 stipulations. M-00-171 21 City of Fridley Land Use Application SP-00-10 September 20, 2000 [:FNERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Vanman Co. Arch. Redeemer Lutheran 733 Winnetka Ave. 61 Mississippi Way Minneapolis, MN 55427 Fridley, MN 55432 Requested Action: Special Use Permit Purpose: To expand a church use in a R-1 Single family residential district. _ Existing 7oning R 1 (Single Family Residential) Location: 61 Mississippi Way NE Size: 205,362 square feet 4.72 acres Existing Land Use: Church facilities. Sutmunding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family, R-1 E: Park, P S: Single Family, R-1 W: Single Family, R-1 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Sections 205.07.1.C.(2) requires churches have a special use permit when located in an R-1 District. Zoning History: 1959 — Lot platted 1959 - First building pemiit issued 1963 — Building Addition 1984 - SP#84-08 granted for addition. 1986 — Building Addition Legal Descriprion of Property: Lot 2, Blk 6 Edgewater Gardens Public Utilities: SPECIAL INFORMATION Water and sewer are available at the srte. Transportation: Mississippi Way provides vehicle access to the site. Physical Characterisrics: Lot is relatively flat, covered by existing church buildings, parking lots, and landscaping. SUMMARY OF PROJECT Redeemer Lutheran is requesting a special use permit to allow the expansion of a stage-like platform, storage, & entry areas. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit. Churches are a permitted special use in the R-1 zoning district, and the expansion proposed by Redeemer Lutheran complies with the requirements for the special use pemut, subject to the stipulations suggested by staff. CITY COUNCIL DATE / 60 DAY ACTION October 9, 2000 / October 17, 2000 Zz (Redeemer Church view from North) Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND Concur with Staff, approve with 4 sripulations. SP 00-10 Analvsis Redeemer Lutheran is requesting a special use pernzit to allow the expansion of the platform, storage, & entry areas. The church is planning to build these addirional facilities in two phases. Phase 1 will be a platform and storage area on the west end of the building and phase 2 will consist of an entry space, offices and some meetina rooms to be located in the open area west of the current worship space. The proposed 249 parkin� stalls which will be in place after phase 2 are more than adequate to meet the code required 133 parkin� stalls. In addition, Redeemer Lutheran Church has staggered service and class times to alleviate parking problems caused by overlapping services. ' t- .-_�, Clockwise from upper left: Original church bldg.; Phase 1 expansion ti.,� � a :�:. . . � w, . _ area; view from North. The building expansion for the platform and storage area (Phase 1) is proposed to be constructed from masonry with rock face and burnished block on the exterior. The color of this addition will blend with the cuirent stucco surface of the chapel on the south side of the building. The architect's intent is to no call addirional attention to the sm.icture. The difficulty with matching brick color of the existing multi-use room is the reasoning why the architect feels the use of these materials is justified. Staffwould like to ensure that these materials are architecturally compatible and have suggested a sripulation requiring staff approval of the masonry product. The new entry and office area (Phase 2) will combine the brick, glass, and stucco materials used on the building to give it an architecnu-ally unified look. The entry will also have a sloped canopy to match the roofs of the existing worship area. 23 Recommendation City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit. Churches are a permitted special use in the R-1 zoning district, and the expansion proposed by Redeemer Lutheran complies with the requirements for the special use pemut, subject to the stipulations suggested by staff. Stipulations Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the special use pernut subject to the following stipulations: 1. City Staff shall review and approve masonry product to be used on Phase 1 exterior expansion. 2. All necessary permits must be obtained prior to beginning construction. 3. Church must accommodate all of their parking needs on their own site. 4. Special Use Pernut SP #00-10 shall replace special Use Pernut SP #84-08. Plannin� Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission concumed with stai�s recommendation. 24 r � CITY OF FRIDLEY DATE: TO: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 October 5, 2000 William W. Burns, City Manager �� Y FROM: Barbara Dacy, Communiry Development Director Paul Bolin, Planner Scott J. Hickok, Planning Coordinator RE: Re-plat, PS-00-02, Brickner Builders INTRODUCTION On September 20, 2000, the Planning Commission considered plat request PS-00-02, by Brickner Builders. Brickner Builders plan to build two new homes facing Flanery Park, where a single home once stood. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of PS-00-02, with 9 stipulations. SUMMARY OF REQUEST Brickner Builders have purchased the property currently addressed as 7440 Bacon Drive and have demolished the single family home and garage that once stood on the site. They have proposed a plat that exceeds the minimum standards defined in the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Two lots are proposed, the first 94' wide and 12,530 s.f. The second lot will be 76' wide and-10,127 s.f. Utilities are available to the site. The plat is surrounded by existing single-family development and is a very desirable setting for two new single-family homes. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of PS-00-02, with 9 stipulations. M-00-173 i 25 City of Fridley Land Use Application PS-00-02 September 20, 2000 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Briclrner Builders 6230 HWY 65 NE #103 Fridley, MN 55432 Requested Action: Replat of property to create 21ots for single family home development. Rxicti � Zcjl�u�g. R 1 Single Family Residential Location: 7440 Bacon Drive NE. Size: 22,657 square feet .52 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family, R-1 E: Park, P S: Single Family, R-1 W: Single Family, R-1 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Use of property is consistent with Plan. Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Single family homes are pemutted in this zoning district, with a minimum lot size of 9,000 square feet. Zoning History: Pre-1949- Home is built. 1950 — Lot is platted. 2000 — Home demolished. Legal Description of Property: North 200' of Lot 9, Aud. Sub. 129 Council Action / 60 Day Action: October 9, 2000 / October 17, 2000 Public Utilities: Located near property. 26 Transportation: Properties are accessed via Bacon Dr. Physical Characteristics: Relatively flat, grass covered lot. SU1VLVIARY OF REQUEST Briclrner Builders, petitioner's, are seeking to replat the property located at 7440 Bacon Drive into 2 single family lots. SUNLVIARY OF ANALYSIS Ciry Staff recommends approval of this plat reqz�est, with stipulations. • Lots exceed minimum size requirements. � Does provide additional homeownership opportunities for Fridley residents. (view of property from Flannery Park) Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin PLAI�IING COMMISSION RECOVIMENDATION Concur with staff, approve with 9 stipularions. PS #00-02 Analysis Brickner Builders, petitioner's, are seeking to replat the property located at 7440 Bacon Drive into 2 single family lots. Fridley requires that lots in the R-1 district be a minimum of 75' in width with a minimum total lot area of 9,000 square feet. The proposed Lot #1 will be 94' in width and 12,530 square feet in size after the replat. The propose Lot #2, will be 76' in width and 10,127 square feet in size after the property is divided. (Photos: Left, View from North; Right, View from East.) Staff Recommendation City Staff recommends approval of this plat request, with stipulations. • Lots exceed minimum size requirements. • Does provide additional homeownership opportunities for Fridley residents. Stipulations City Staff recommend that the following stipulations be placed upon approval of this request. 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Any remaining debris from demolition of existing home and any brush piles on site shall be removed prior to granting of final plat. 3. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties. 4. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 27 6. Petitioner to pay $750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of buiiding permits. 7. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 9. Petitioner shall provide a 12' drainage and utility easement along the westerly property line of proposed lots 1& 2.. Planninq Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission concurred with staff's recommendation. : � AGENDA ITEM f CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CfTY OF FRIDLEY DATE: October 5, 2000 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planner Scott J. Hickok, Planning Coordinator �� Special Use Permit, SP-00-09, APT Minneapolis 1NTRODUCTION On September 20, 2000, the Planning Commission considered Special Use Permit, SP-00-09, by APT Minneapolis regarding their plans to install a 120' telecommunications tower in an Industrial district. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of SP-00-09, with 10 stipulations. SUMMARy pF REQUEST APT (American Portable Telecom) has requested a special use permit to allow the construction of telecommunications facilities and equipment in an Industrial district. Code Section 205.18.1.C. (7), requires a special use permit prior to constructing such facilities. APT first sought a locarion on an etcisting facility, or at least, on an approved site and determined that the locarions were either out of range for their network, or the owner of the approved site was not willing to cooperate. As a result, APT negotiated terms with Richazd Cazlson who owns an industrially zoned parcel, west of Park Construcrion. An existing access is in place allowing movement to and from the site with out reconstructing the access to Beech Street. Between the proposed facility and Beech Street is pazk construction and approved outdoor storage. The APT Facility tower will blend somewhat with NSP stanchions and equipment in the area. The ground equipment will be partially screened by Park Construction and partially screened by the plantings that have been required through the City's telecommunicarions ordinance. To the west, there is developed Industrially zoned property between this proposed facility and the residents west of the railroad tracks. As a result, impacts will be minunai. RECOI�L�IENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of SP-00-09, with 10 stipulations. M-00-172 29 City of Fridley Land Use Application SP #00-09 September 20, 2000 �:FNF,RAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Richard Carlson APT Minneapolis 2238 Ferris Lane 8000 W. 78'� ST. Roseville, MN 55113 Minneapolis, MN 55439 Requested Action: Special Use Permit to allow the constiuction of a 120' telecommunications tower in an industrial zoning district Exisang Zonu�g: M-2 (Heavy Industrial) Location: 7900 Beech Street NE Size: 457,380 sq. ft. 10.5 acres Existing Land Use: Industrial (Park Construction) Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Industrial & M-3 E: Industrial & M-3 S: Industrial & M-3 W: Industrial & M-1 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Sections 205.18.1.C.(7) requires a special use pemut to allow telecommunication towers and wireless telecommunications in an industriallY zoned area. Zoning History: 1972 – 1 S` Building is constructed Legal Descriprion of Property: 10.5 acres of the W. half of the NE '/4 of Secrion 3. Public Urilities: Available nearby. Transportarion: Beech Street provides access to site. Physical Characterisrics: Lot contains Park Construction buildings and outdoor storage. — SUMMARY OF PROJECT APT (American Portable Telecom), petirioner, is requesting a special use pemiit to allow the construction of a 120' telecommunications tower on property owned by Richard Carlson located at 7900 Beech Street. SUNIMARY OF ANALYSIS Staff recommends approval of Special Use Permit #00-09 to allow the construction of a 120' telecommunications tower at 7900 Beech Street, with stipulations. • Proposed tower meet criteria set forth in code. CITY COU�ICIL DATE / 60 DAY ACTION October 9, 2000 / October 17, 2000 (Entrance to Structure trom ueecn ��ro�� Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 30 The Planning Commission concuired with staf�s recommendation for approval with 10 stipulations. SP #00-09 PROJECT APT (American Portable Telecom), petitioner, is requesting a special use permit to allow the construction of a 120' telecommunications tower on property owned by Richard Carlson located at 7900 Beech Street. A 59' x 59' fenced compound will also be required as part of this proposal. TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT HISTORY :. In 1996, the federal government passed a new Telecommunications Act. This act affected wired and wireless operators of telecommunication services, cable television, open video systems, multi-channel video distribution, telephone, long distance, data transmission, cellular phone, personal communication services (PCS), and direct broadcast satellites. Over the past four years the number of 75' to 250' monopole towers or lattice-type tower structures has been on the rise in both metro and rural locations across the state. The 1996 Telecommunications Act opened the door to a whole new wave of technology. Communities have been required to recognize and accept the new technology. Cities do have the ability to control the location of PCS towers, however, cities cannot take a position of "not in my city". A typical PCS tower may have a 75' to 125' monopole structure. Ample ground area is generally required to allow the electronic control devices to exist beside the base of the tower. A chain link fence surrounding the tower and equipment is typically required. With siie users such as APT there is very little encroachment on the land, beyond the pole itself. In this particular case, APT is proposing a 59' x 59' chain link fence to surround and secure the base of the tower and control devices. TELECOMMUNICATION ACT'S IMPACT ON FRIDLEY In December of 1996, the City Council established a moratorium temporarily prohibiting the construction of new communication and antennae array. The moratorium establishment allowed the City to take a comprehensive look at the impact of the 1996 Telecommunications Act and establish acceptable antennae locations. With the moratorium in place, staff worked with PCS consultants to get a clear understanding of the technology, issues, and to determine how many antennae locations would likely be required to serve the community. As a result of the analysis, an approved site approach was approved. The City of Fridley now has a series of approved sites for the installation of wireless telecommunications facilities. To install a telecommunication tower in an industrially zoned area not on the "approved site" list, a special use permit must be obtained. APT's proposed site, located at 7900 Beech Street, is not an approved site and therefore a special use permit is required for APT to proceed with the installation of the 120' monopole. 31 SPECIAL USE PERMIT ANALYSIS The purpose of a special use permit is to provide the City with a reasonable degree of discretion in determining the suitability of certain uses upon the general welfare, public health and safety of the area in which it is located. The special use permit gives the City the ability to place stipulations on the proposed use to eliminate negative impacts to surrounding properties. The City also has the right to deny the special use permit request if impacts to surrounding properties cannot be eliminated through stipulations. With SP#00-09, the petitioner is seeking the special use permit to construct a 120' telecommunications tower. Telecommunications towers are a permitted special use in the M-2 Heavy Industrial zoning district. This telecommunications tower is designed so that it will withstand wind and ice loads as required by the Uniform Building Code. The negative impact from this proposal is that the appearance of the tower will not be consistent with the surrounding area. The petitioner's Radio Frequency engineers have indicated the location of a tower in this location or the immediate vicinity is crucial to link in with their existing system. The petitioner was unsuccessful in their attempts at placing a tower on the Agro-K site at 8030 Main Street. Agro-K was placed on the City's "approved site" list despite the property owner's objection to the designation. The petitioner has indicated that the monopole will be constructed to accommodate two other providers, as code requires. The pole finish will be approved by City Staff to ensure that the pole blends with the surrounding environment as much as possible and the ground control structures will be screened f�om the public rights of way. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Special Use Permit #00-09 to allow the construction of a 120' telecommunications tower at 7900 Beech Street, with stipulations. STIPULATIONS If the Planning Commission were to grant this Special Use Permit request, staff recommends that the following stipulations be attached. 1. The petitioner or successors sha/l install and maintain the proposed eguipment so that it blends into the surrounding environment. 2. A non-corrosive �nish shall be used to paint the pole an "eggshell" white. 3. The tower shall not be arti�cially illuminated except as required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). 4. All screening plantings shall be installed in accordance with the landscape plan, dated July 21, 2000, submitted by APT. 5. The facility shall be designed to discourage unauihorized entry. 6. A building permit shall be obtained prior to commencement of installation of any facility equipment on this site. �� 7. No signs other than warning or equipment information signs are permitted as par# of this application. 8. Any future placement of antennae on the tower shall require review by the City to determine if the equipment location requires additional stipulations or a revised special use permit 9. Petitioner shall utilize existing drive; any new drives to be created need to be paved in accordance with City Code. 10. No barbed wire shali be used on the fence surrounding this structure. Planninq Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission concurred with staffs recommendation. 33 / AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 QfY OF FRIDLEY DATE: October 6, 2000 � TO: William Burns, City Manager �� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator SUBJECT: Removal of Trees on Gateway East Site Chapter 510 of Fridley City Code requires that the City Council approve the removal of the trees on public property. The Fridley HRA is currently in the process of redeveloping the Gateway East project near the corner of the 57tn Avenue and University Avenue, behind the Rapid Oil Change facility. There are several trees on the site which need to be removed prior to starting the project. Unfortunately, few of the trees can be saved, however staff is proposing to leave some of the trees in place as a�atural buffer. A site plan is attached - showing the location of the trees to be removed. As a side note, staff has received a number of complaints from local residents about children loitering in the area due to the overgrown conditions. The good news is that the developer will be required to prepare a landscape plan for the new project, which is tentatively scheduled to begin next spring. The tree removal was approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission on October 2nd. The Planning Commission did not have meeting this week, but will be advised of the tree removal at their next meeting on October 18tn Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the HRA's removal of the trees shown on attached plan for the Gateway East site. M-00-164 34 �� ; �� 4 g� � �� r� �� R s ��! ' �'a � �r �$$ � r �� p We N� '� g Qo ° s �� W W W � ,n � �- z s i'" � � a= a a � J I"� W� W d W a N F- J �'' a '- C.7 �. � N 1-- U7 I�i h N �O � V� .� � � � :no��s-,y,t-�------ Cf'002 3.20d0.00 N i-•—�r�•—•—•—•-f• _ ,�•—•—•—'_'_'— _'r! nvnv o�iiYOO iiicv�i/i/n >- � Z a N � Z�� Q m W N Z � � X O Z � Wvacn r i a : ` � �IIIIIIIIIIII �IsBx � U t � I I I I I I I I I I I �� b 2� 1 �' N ,� � °--•-•'-••-°-•--•- , ��# � � � •--••—•-- --••----_, ___ _______. :,�,,,„�„ �:; L�;/ � 4 r � � a o r � e� � 6 � �� = � � � � . � �� . ea ;_ �� i �� $ :!� �� a ? a � � CRY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 William W. Burns, City Manager �� John G. Flora,'Public Works Director Jon H. a kaas, Assistant Public Works Director October 9, 2000 Change Order No. 4 to Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 - 1 PW00-122 The attached change order covers additional work on our Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000-1 to provide proper drainage on University Avenue East Service Drive and 73`� Avenue Service Drive and also for the repaving of Madsen Park parking lot. During the course of construction, it was deternuned that it was necessary to install additional storm sewer catch basins due to the straightening and widening of the curb lines on the service drives. This work includes installation of new catch basins, reconstruction of several existing catch basins, additional storm sewer pipe, additional castings and final adjustments of castings and valve covers. The cost for this work totaled $18,045.00 The parking lot for Madsen Pazk has been identified as excessively deteriorated for several years. Late in the project development, the reconstruction of the parking lot was added to the job. This included installation of concrete curb and gutter, handicap accessible pedestrian ramps, a storm sewer extension for drainage, repaving and restriping of the lot to City standards for parking stall size and spacing. However, the quantities for this work did not get added into the original bid documents. The total cost for this additional work is $14,025.00. Net cost for Change Order No. 4 is $32,070.00. This represents an increase of 4.7% over the current contract amount. Recommend the City Council approve Change Order No. 4 to the 2000 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 - 1 to W. B. Miller in the amount of $32,070.00. JHH/JGF:cz Attachment 36 CITY OF FRIDLEY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 6431 UNNERSI'TY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 October 9, 2000 W. B. Miller, Inc. 6701 Norris Lake Rd Elk River, MN 55330 SUBJECT: Change Order No. 4, Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 - 1 Gentlemen: You are hereby ordered, authorized, and instructed to modify your contract for the Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000 - 1 by adding the following work: Addition: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Item Type 41A wearing course mix (w/oil) Type 31 binder course (w/oil) Concrete curb and gutter design B618 Furnish and install catch basin casting Construct catch basin Storm sewer catch basin connection Adjust frame, ring and casting Adjust valve box TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS: quanritY 150 Ton 200 Ton 500 LF 9 Ea 10 Ea 10 Ea 19 Ea 5 Ea TOTAL ADDITIONS ....... Original Contract Amount ............................................................. Contract Additions - Change Order No. 1 ....................................... No. 2 ....................................... No. 3 ....................................... No. 4 ....................................... Price 31.50 30.00 6.60 275.00 725.00 350.00 205.00 185.00 Amount 4,725.00 6,000.00 3,300.00 2,475.00 7,250.00 3,500.00 3,895.00 925.00 ...................... $ 32,070.00 ............................... $658,507.00 ................................... 11,199.80 ....................................... 5,400.00 ....................................... 1,650.00 ..................................... 32,070.00 REVISED CONTRACT AMOIJNT $708,826.80 37 W. B. Miller, Inc. Change Order No. 4 October 9, 2000 Page 2 Submitted and approved by John G. Flora, Public Works Director, on the 9th day of October 2000. Prepared by Checked by ��'G'/��'�' . Flora, P.E. Director of Public Works Approved and accepted this day of , 2000 by W. B. Miller, Inc. Greg Holm, Project Coordinator Approved and accepted this Sth day of June, 2000 by CITY OF FRIDLEY Nancy J. Jorgenson, Mayor William W. Burns, City Manager Approved and accepted this day of , 2000 by Metro Division Assistant State Aid Engineer : � CRY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 WII.LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER ` � RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR RESOLUTION ABATING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS AREA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DATE: September 21, 2000 Attached you will fmd a resolution abating assessments on the assessment roll and adding new assessments for the Riverview Heights Area Improvement Project. Council passed the original assessment on May 8, 2000. At that time, there were several properties with more than one Property Identification Number (PIl�. The property owners had been informed that if they combined their PIN numbers into one PIN number they would only be assessed one charge of $1,000 for the storm water portion of the assessment. Since May 8, the City has received confirmation from Anoka County of 8 new PINs that have been combined from 24 old PINs. The schedule of the old and new PINs is attached. We recommend that Council pass the attached resolution abating the assessments of the old PIN numbers and approving the assessment of the new PIN numbers. RDP/sf Attachment 39 RESOLUTION NO. - 2000 A RESOLUTION ABATING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS AREA IlVIPROVEMENT PROJECT. WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the assessment for the Riverview Heights Area Improvement Project on May 8, 2000; and WHEREAS, property owners were informed that if their properties included more than one Parcel Identification Number (PII� and they combined their properties into one PIN number, they would only have one assessment for the storm water portion of the project; and WHEREAS, since the adoption of the assessment a number of properties have been combined and have received new PINs from Anoka County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley hereby abates the assessments for the Riverview Heights properties as noted on the attached copy, which is made a part hereof, and adopts the assessments for the properties as noted on the attached copy. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY TI� CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS _ DAY OF 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK � �� NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR Name Anoka County Highway Dept Anoka, MN 55303 Golie Byron 210 Heritage Lane New Brighton, MN 55112 City of Fridley HRA 6431 University Avenue Fridley, MN 55432 Micke, Dennis & J M Bressler 621 Lafayette Street Fridley, MN 55432 Schneppmueller, Donald & D A 8151 Riverview Terr NE Fridley, MN 55432 Drummond John 1920 1�` St S #1709 Minneapolis, MN 55454 Myrvold, Dwayne SR & Dawn 554 Janesville St Fridley, MN 55432 Geis, Michael J. & Claudia R. 520 Dover Street Fridley, MN 55432 Geis, Michael J. & Ciaudia R. 520 Dover Street Old PIN No. 03-30-24-23-0017 03-30.2423-0018 03-30-2423-0019 8200 ERR 03-30-24-23-0048 03-30-24-23-0049 573 Hugo St 03-30-24-22-0073 611 Lafayette Street 03-30-24-22-0074 03-30-24-23-0218 04-30-24-14-0023 04-30-24-11-0006 04-30-24-14-0005 04-30-24-14-0006 Lots 15 & 16 Blk O Riverview Heights, TOG/W Lot 16 Rev Aud Sub No 103 03-30-24-23-0038 03-30-24-23-0039 03-30-24-32-0040 03-30-24-32-0041 03-30-24-32-0042 03-30-24-32-0046 03-30-24-32-0047 03-30-24-32-0048 03-30-24-32-0049 03-30-24-32-0050 03-30-24-32-0168 03-30-24-32-0171 41 Old Assessment $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 New PIN No. New Assessme: 03-30-2423-0238 $ 1,000.00 03-30-24-23-0239 � $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 � 03-30-24-22-0132 � $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,547.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1.000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 04-30-24140024 $ 1,000.00 1,547.00 04-30-2411-0075 $ 1,000.00 03-30-24-23-0240 � $ 1,000.00 03-30-24-32-0193 � $ 1,000.00 03-30-24-32-0192 � $ 1,0OO.OQ � � CRY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 WILLIAM W. B URNS, CITY MANAGER ��'" RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: RESOL UTION RELATING TO THE CITY OF FRIDLEY'S TAX RATE A UTHORIZATIDN FOR THE YEAR 2001 DATE: OCTOBER 3, 2000 In the 1999 Minnesota Laws, Chapter 243, a change was made to the formula for certifying the property tax levy to the County. The law defines a process for a taxing jurisdiction to levy taxes. The law created a new term called "levy certification ta,r rate. " This is a theoretical tax rate that cannot be exceeded unless a city adopts a resolution indicating that there is an intent to increase the tax rate above this theoretical rate. If the City exceeds the tax rate as calculated in the formula below without passing a resolution, the County must then role the rate back to the theoretical rate. The City is required to start with the `2000 Certified Net Tax Capacity Levy' and from that subtract the `Payable 2001 Area-wide Portion of the Levy' and also the `Payable 2001 HACA Fiscal Disparity Adjustment'. The number arrived at is called the `Net Levy'. This number is then divided by the Payable 2001 Taxable Net Tax Capacity to arrive at a percentage called Levy `Certification Tax Rate'. This theoretical levy certification tax rate cannot be exceeded unless the City passes a resolution indicating its intent to surpass the percent in the last calculation. The reason behind the change was to stop some cities from communicating that they are not increasing taxes when in fact they are increasing the levy. This statement has been made by some communities that are attempting to use the statement by keeping the tax capacity rate the same, but levying more in taxes and making use of the increase in taxable value. By using this scheme, statements have been made that taxes have not increased because the tax capacity rate has stayed the same when in fact their levy has increased. This new law is an attempt to put an end to that type of statement. I have contacted Anoka County and found out that they have contacted nine cities so far and all nine have or will be presenting resolutions to their City Councils. We are concerned about how changes in taxable value can have an impact on the amount we are allowed to levy. Because of this we are recommending that Council pass the attached resolution allowing the city to maintain the required tax levy that has already been forwarded to the County. 42 RESOLUTION NO. -2000 A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE CITY OF FRIDLEY'S TAX RATE AUTHORIZATION FOR THE YEAR 2001 WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has enacted Chapter 243, Laws of Minnesota 1999, Article 6, Section 2 requiring a city council to have adopted and filed an authorizing resolution if its city's tax rate turns out to be higher the following year than a theoretical tax rate for the previous year under the law; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley is proposing to levy $4,225,071 for taxes payable 2001 as compared to $4,035671 for taxes payable in 2000; and WHEREAS, if the pay 2001 levy were divided by the pay 2000 tax capacity, the tax rate would increase over pay 2000; and WHEREAS, the proposed budget was prepared with a commitment to continue the highest level of service while minimizing any increase in the 2001 city tax rate; and WHEREAS, due to increasing costs and increased demands for services, the budget proposes to increase dollars levied to support this budget; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City council of the City of Fridley acknowledges that the taac rate for the City of Fridley for taxes payable 2001, is higher than the tax rate for t.he previous year, if calculated using the payable 2000 ta�c capacity. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that an o�cial copy of this adopted resolution be filed with the county auditor who for purposes of this law in Anoka County is the Division Manager of Property Records and Taxation. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN, CITY CLERK 43 NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR / � qTY OF FRIDLEY Name Kenneth Small Jane Oster AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 Position Public Services Worker - Sewer Non-exempt Receptionist/ License Clerk Non-exempt Appointment Starting Salary $13.21 per hour contract $13.15 per hour .. Starting Date Oct. 12, 2000 Oct. 16, 2000 Replaces Gary Ellestad Sue Anne Kirkham � AGENDA ITEM t COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CRY OF FRIDLEY CLAIMS 95699 - 95929 45 � � GTY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 LICENSES Type of License: � SOLICITOR Blaine Jaycees Lisa Celt GAS SERVICES Practical Systems 14226 Norden Dr Rogers MN 55374 Troy Lynch GENERAL CONTRACTOR-COMMERCIAL Ebert Inc 23350 Co Rd 10 Corcoran MN 55357 James Rasmussen Overhead Construction 17259 N Creek Dr Farmington MN 55024 Bryan Eggebraaten Vanman Construction Co 733 Winnetka Ave N Golden Valley MN 55427 Tad Swedin Zeman Construction Co 2900 Washington Ave N Minneapolis MN 55411 Mark Zeman Same GENERAL CONTRACTOR-RESIDENTIAL Design Renovations Inc (20078966) 1128W7St St Paul MN 55102 Tim Christensen Ives Enterprises Inc 2945 140 Ave Ham Lake MN 55304 Dennis Boisvert Kruse Construction Co (20192367) 2436 Irving Ave S Minneapolis MN 55405 John Kruse Martinson Construction (20008232) 3009 172 Ave NW Anoka MN 55304 AI Martinson 46 Approved By: Police Dept., Fire Dept., Planning Dept. RON JULKOWSKI Building Official RON JULKOWSKI Building O�cial Same Same STATE OF MINN Same Same Same Fees: Type of License: � GENERAL CONTRACTOR-RESIDENTIAL (CONT.) Norling Exteriors Inc 341 79 Way Fridley MN 55432 Jim Norling Renaissance Exteriors (20220285) 2556 Hwy 10 Mounds View MN 55112 Jeff Pattison Rosecraft Architectural Woodwork (20094989) 1743 Margaret St St Paul, MN 55106 Kevin Rosbacka MOBILE HOME INSTALLER G& A Mobile Home Listing Co 14160 Hwy 65 NE Ham Lake MN 55303 PLUMBING HIS Plumbing Co Inc 5132 Gorgas Ave Edina MN 55424-1413 Don Hardacker J L Bjorlin Plumbing 1561 Bunker Lake Blvd Ham Lake MN 55304 Jim Bjorlin 47 Approved By: STATE OF MINN Same Same STATE OF MINN STATE OF MINN Same Fees: � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CRY OF FRIDLEY ESTIMATES Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. Holstad and Knaak, P.L.C. 3535 Vadnais Center Drive St. Paul, MN 55110 Services Rendered as City Attorney for the Month of September, 2000 ................................................................................. $ 5,000.00 W.B. Miller, Inc. 6701 Norris Lake Road N.W. Elk River, MN 55330 2000 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000-1 EstimateNo. 7 ...................................................................................... $131,422.28 48 � � CRY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER ,,� (j�V� WILLIAM A., CHAMPA, MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING TO EVALUATE THE CABLE SYSTEM FRANCHISE PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY WIDEOPENWEST MINNESOTA, LLC DATE: OCTOBER 5, 2000 This item is a continuation of the September 25 public hearing to evaluate the cable system franchise proposal submitted by WideOpenWest (WOV� Minnesota, LLC. At the September 25 meeting, WOW had an opportunity to summarize their application. A draft cable franchise ordinance was also presented for initial review. Staff recommended that the public hearing be continued to give City Attorney Fritz Knaak and WOW's attorney ample time to review the most recent franchise ordinance language. We were also waiting for a letter from our auditor confirming our findings of fact relating to the financial qualifications of the applicant. At this time, the letter has not been provided to the City. In addition, WOW seeks additional time to review and comment on the proposed franchise language. In light of these developments, staff recommends continuation of this public hearing to the October 23 Council meeting. .• � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CITY OF FRIDIEY Date: 10/4/00 � To: William W. Burns, City Manager�� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Re: Public Hearing, Qwest Wireless LLC, ZTA #00-02, To Amend Appendix A of the O-5, Telecommunication District to Create an Approved Site PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission at its September 20, 2000 meeting unanimously recommended approval of ZTA #00-02 to create an "approved site" for telecommunications facilities. Qwest Wireless is proposing to locate a wireless antenna on top of a NSP pole in the Cheri Lane right of way, just north of Menards, subject to the following four stipulations: 1. The ground equipment shall be installed above grade with the vegetation proposed in the landscaping plan, and the landscaping shall be maintained by the petitioner. 2. Ground equipment and the cylinder on top of the pole shall be colored brown to match the MnDOT equipment. 3. The petitioner shall submit a copy of the joint use agreement with NSP to the city prior to the installation of the service. 4. No additional antenna may be installed on the subject NSP pole, other than the two proposed in the application. The staff recommendation to the Planning Commission was to recommend that the "ground equipment" be installed below grade. The Planning Commission felt that the proposed vegetation to screen the equipment was more appropriate than installing the equipment underground. The petitioner stated that the underground facility would have to be ventilated which would still require above ground equipment. Staff maintains its original recommendation, as found in the attached report. If technology and demand are such that these types of facilities will be located along the right of way, multiplied by several providers, the City should work aggressively to require the ground equipment be placed below grade to avoid the proliferation of all different types of boxes. 50 RECOMMENDATION Since the Planning Commission meeting, the petitioner has complied with stipulation #3 and there is no longer a need to list it as a stipulation. The City Council should conduct the public hearing on Monday night. First reading of the ordinance is also scheduled for Council action under New Business later in the agenda. :�.. M-00-168 51 City of Fridley Land Use Application ZTA-00-02 September 15, 2000 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Qwest Wireless LLC. 426 N. Fairview Avenue. Room 101 St. Paul, MN 55104 Requested Action: To amend Appendix A of the O-5, Telecommunication District to create an additional "Approved Site" for wireless telecommunication facilities Purpose: To install a wireless telecommunication antenna on top of an existing NSP power pole Existing Zoning: Wood power pole located within the Cheri Lane right of way adjacent to Menards General Locations: 1200 Cheri Lane Existing Land Use: Wood power/electric pole. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Cherie Lane and I-694 E: C-3, Menards S: C-3, Menards W: C-3, Menards Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: The site is not currently permitted as an approved site for telecommunications. Legal Description of Property: To be determined Transportation: Access from Cherie Lane Physical Characteristics: 52 Area is currently grass and planted trees maintained by Menards. SUMMARY OF PROJECT Qwest is proposing to locate a wireless telecommunication antenna on an existing NSP power pole. The existing pole height is about 37 feet tall. With the antenna, the height would be about 42 feet, exclusive of the 2 foot lightning rod. The petitioner states that the antenna because of a variety of technical issues cannot be located on existing approved sites. STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends approval of the site as an Approved site with stipt�lations. Staff recommends that the petitioner install the ground equipment below grade. CITY COUNCIL ACTION October 9, 2000 60 DAY DATE October 17, 2000 Staff Report Prepared by: Barbara Dacy '��..� > 6 . . . � � � -�; .._ ZTA #00-OZ Bac ound Qwest Wireless, LLC has filed an application to amend appendix A of the O-5, Telecommunications Overlay Zoning District to create an Approved Site for installation of a wireless communication facility. Qwest proposed to locate an antenna on top of an existing NSP wood power pole in the street right of way for Cheri Lane adjacent to the Menard's commercial property. Legal Basis for Review The O-5, Telecommunication District establishes several criteria to create a"Approved Site". The petitioner has examined these criteria and provided a response to each requirement. The O-5 District establishes the Approved Site process similar to a rezoning application, and requires a 4/Sths vote of the Council to approve an ordinance establishing the site in Appendix A of the District as an Approved Site. An approved site means that wireless telecommunication facilities are a permitted use, are reviewed by staff, and do not require further public hearings. Proposed Construction Qwest proposes to replace the existing wood NSP pole with a new pole that would not only carry the overhead power line but also would have an wireless antenna on the top of the pole. The required ground equipment is also proposed at the base of the pole. A landscaping plan has also been submitted to screen the equipment. The proposed site is located just outside the Menard property line on the east side of the driveway entrance from Cheri Lane. The area in which it is to be located has been recently landscaped (when Menards finished their recent expansion) and contains a few trees, grass, and a small depression for storm water detention. Policv Issues The City has amended the O-5 District for overall system plans like Cell Net, which is an automatic meter reading system for electric meters. The ordinance was amended to permit these types of installations since the antennas were to be housed in small green boxes to be located on utility poles across the City. In this application, a smaller version of a"tower" is proposed on an existing structure in order to fill a coverage need for the eompany. The City anticipated that the time would be coming that more and more antennas are necessary due to demand by the public and the existence of a competitive industry. The future has arrived. 53 Upon initial contact, staff advised the petitioner to evaluate the existing Approved Site at Matterhorn Reservoir and the site at University Avenue and I-694. The petitioner claims that both of these locations are too far from the area that they want to provide coverage. The pole suggested as an Approved Site is approximately 'h mile from the Matterhorn Reservoir, and at least 3/4`�'s of a mile from the University/I-694 site. This application represents the first formal request by the telecommunication industry to locate services on existing structures within the right of way, with the exception of Cell Net mentioned earlier. Another company named Metricom who provides internet data service may be requesting approval of a network of small antennas on light poles in the near future. There are advantages and disadvantages to the requested Approved Site: Pros: • Antenna is located on a structure that already exists • Co-locating two utility services on one structure • Capable of an additional "unipac" installation, according to the petitioner • Eliminates the necessity of a larger 125 foot monopole • Meets the intent of a majority of the Approved Site criteria Cons: • Ground equipment adds more visual clutter in the boulevards • Ground equipment adds more obstructions for maintenance/plowing • Additional antennas on poles may add more visual clutter along highways • Adding a second installation on the wood pole may look worse! The petitioner also submitted examples of other similar installations in other cities; pictures are included in the report. The petitioner's landscaping plan includes 6 foot tall techny arborvitae and other shrubbery to screen the ground equipment. One of the objectives of the O-5 District is to "minimize adverse visual impacts of Towers and Wireless Telecommunications Facilities through careful design, sitting, landscaping, and innovative camouflaging techniques". Instead of the landscaping option above ground, staff recommends that the ground equipment be placed below grade to eliminate the impacts of additional ground equipment in the right of way. If technology and demand are such that these types of facilities will be located along the right of way, multiplied by several providers, the City should work aggressively to require the ground equipment be placed below grade to avoid the proliferation of all different types of boxes. 54 Staff Recommendation City Staff recommends approval of ZTA #00-02 to add an Approved Site to Appendix A of the O- S Telecommunication District with the following stipulations: 1. The ground equipment shall be installed below grade. 2. The petitioner shall obtain a right of way permit from the City to permit construction within the right of way. 3. The petitioner shall submit a copy of the joint use agreement with NSP to the City prior to installation of the service. 4. No additional antenna may be installed on the subject NSP pole unless ground equipment can be buried, and a structural engineer provides documentation that the pole can support another installation. 55 / � CRY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 WII�LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �,I° � gICHARD D, pgIgyL, FINANCE DIRECTOR AL FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE ON THE 2000 WEED ABATEMENT DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the 2000 Weed Abatemen� The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 21, 2000 as required by State Statute. RDP/sf Attachment 56 PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridley City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. on October 9, 2000 to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment for the 2000 Weed Abatement. Adoption by the council of the proposed assessment may occur at the hearing. The following areas are the areas proposed to be assessed: 650 DOVER STREET 580 FAIRMONT STREET 5805 3RD STREET The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $404.70. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjoumed meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 14-1995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The City Council may approve defeRal of payment of special assessments where the payment of said special assessments constitute a hardship. Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayor Publish: September 21, 2000 57 AGENDA ITEM �J CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CffY OF FRIDIEY TO: WII.,LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGE l" � FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR AL FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE ON TI� 2000 NUISANCE ABATEMENT DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the 2000 Nuisance Abatement. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 21, 2000 as required by State Statute. RDP/sf Attachment : PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridley City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. on October 9, 2000 to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment for the 2000 Nuisance Abatement. Adoption by the council of the proposed assessment may occur at the hearing. The following area is the area proposed to be assessed: 238 Ely Street 170 Craigbrook Way 650 Dover Street 125 Alden Circle 5800 Tennison Drive N.E. The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $5,839.24. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 14-1995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The City Council may approve deferral of payment of special assessments where the payment of said special assessments constitute a hardship. Publish: September 21, 2000 Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayor 59 � a CffY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 TO: WII,LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER t° � FROM: SUBJECT: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR AL FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE ON TI� 2000 TREE ABATEMENT DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the 2000 Tree Abatement. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 21, 2000 as required by State Statute. RDP/sf Attachment .1 PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridley City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. on October 9, 2000 to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment for the 2000 Tree Abatement. Adoption by the council of the proposed assessment may occur at the hearing. The following areas are the areas proposed to be assessed: 579 HUGO STREET The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $2,288.13. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prio� to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The council may upon such notice consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 14-1995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The City Council may approve deferral of payment of special assessments where the payment of said special assessments constitute a hardship. Publish: September 21, 2000 Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayor 61 AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CfTY OF FRIDLEY TO: WII.,LIAM W. BURNS, CTTY MANAGER �� r� FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE EAST RNER ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0.1995-4 DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the East River Road Improvement Project No. 1995-4. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 21, 2000 as required by State Statute. RDP/sf Attacliment �� PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridley City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. on October 9, 2000 to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment for the East River Road Improvement Project No. 1995-4. Adoption by the council of the proposed assessment may occur at the hearing. The area proposed to be assessed includes the properties On East River Road from Kimball Street to the north City Boundary The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $3,130. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The council may upon such notice consider an objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 14-1995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The City Council may approve deferral of payment of special assessments where the payment of said special assessments constitute a hardship. Publish: September 21, 2000 Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayo� 63 AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CfiY OF FRIDLEY TO: WII,LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �� FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CENTRAL AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0.1998-4 DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the Central Avenue Improvement Project No. 1998-4. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 21, 2000 as required by State Statute. RDP/sf Attachment .' � PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridiey City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. on October 9, 2000 to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment for the Central Avenue Improvement Project No. 1998-4. Adoption by the council of the proposed assessment may occur at the hearing. The area proposed to be assessed includes the properties Along Central Avenue from 66th Avenue to Osborne Road The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $129,856.91. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The council may upon such notice consider an objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 14-1995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The City Council may approve deferral of payment of special assessments where the payment of said special assessments constitute a hardship. Publish: September 21, 2000 Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayor 65 AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 OTY OF FRIDLEY �� , TO: WII.,LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER�� FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE STREET IlVIPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2000-1 DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2000-1. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 21, 2000 as required by State Statute. RDP/sf Attachment .. PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridley City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. on October 9, 2000 to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment for the Street Improvement Project No. 2000-1. Adoption by the council of the proposed assessment may occur at the hearing. The area proposed to be assessed includes the properties Addressed on; University East Service Drive from 73�d Avenue to Osborne Road, 74th Avenue from University Avenue East Service Drive to Lyric Lane, Symphony Street from 73'd Avenue to 74th Avenue, 73�d Avenue Service Drive from University Avenue to Able Street and properties abutting 71st Avenue in the Northco Drive Development area. The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $113,836.88. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The council may upon such notice consider an objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayo� or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 14-1995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The City Council may approve deferral of payment of special assessments where the payment of said special assessments constitute a hardship. Publish: September 21, 2000 Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayor 67 r � CfIY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �� RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE RICE CREEK PHASE 2 BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the Rice Creek Phase 2 Bank Stabilization Project. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 21, 2000 as required by State Statute. RDP/sf Attachment .: PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridley City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. on October 9, 2000 to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment for the Rice Creek Phase 2 Bank Stabilization Project. Adoption by the council of the proposed assessment may occur at the hearing. The area proposed to be assessed includes the properties Bordering Rice Creek from University Avenue downstream to the BNSF railroad tracks. The proposed assessment roll is on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. The total amount of the proposed assessment is $17,800. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding o�cer at the hearing. The council may upon such notice consider an objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting upon such further notice to the affected property owners as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such no#ice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 14-1995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The City Council may approve deferral of payment of special assessments where the payment of said special assessments constitute a hardship. Publish: September 21, 2000 Nancy J. Jorgenson Mayor �� AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 QTY OF FRIDLEY Date: 10/4/00 To: William W. Burns, City Manager h�� 1 � From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director RE: Resolution Regarding Advanced Corridor Plan, NCDA Northstar Commuter Rail Project PROPOSED RESOLUTION A draft resolution has been prepared based on the comments from the informational meeting, Planning Commission meeting, and the comments from the City Council meeting of September 25, 2000. There are a number of "whereas" statements on the iirst page to document the record as to the proposed request. The public comments and concerns about traffic, noise, site design, crime, location, process, and maintenance issues are specified in the remaining "whereas" statements on page two of the resolution. The "be it resolved" statements identify the recommendations of the Planning Commission and staff. To summarize, the resolution says three things: 1) the City "disapproves the Advanced Corridor Plan as submitted"; 2) the City requests the NCDA to evaluate other station sites in Fridley which might have less impact on residential areas; and 3) if the station is located at 61 � Avenue/61 � Way, there are several conditions which must be addressed. In addition, the resolution requests the NCDA to respond to the other issues identified in the "be it resolved" statements. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached resolution as presented. :� .. M-00-165 7� RESOLUTION NO. -2000 A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE ADVANCED CORRIDOR PLAN OF THE NORTHSTAR COMMUTER RAIL STATION WHEREAS, the Northstar Commuter Rail Development Authority (NCDA) is a multi-jurisdictional joint powers entity empowered to study multi-modal transportation systems in Hennepin, Anoka, Benton, and Sherburne Counties; and WHEREAS, the NCDA is proposing an 80 mile commuter rail system extending from St. Cloud to downtown Minneapolis in conjunction with other transportation system improvements; and WHEREAS, the proposed commuter rail system will utilize the existing tracks of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad; and WHEREAS, said railroad tracks run through the City of Fridley; and WHEREAS, a commuter rail station is proposed in the City of Fridley; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 174.86 requires cities to review and comment on the proposed location and design of commuter rail stations as depicted in "advanced corridor plans"; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley received a request to complete the statutory defined process via a letter dated August 4, 2000 signed by the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and the Northstar Corridor Development Authority Chairperson; and WHEREAS, the Northstar Corridor Development authority (NCDA) conducted its statutory required public hearing on the Advanced Corridor Plan on September 7, 2000; and WHEREAS, the statute requires the City to complete its review within 45 days of said hearing by the NCDA; and WHEREAS, the NCDA and the City of Fridley conducted an informational meeting on August 2, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Fridley Planning Commission received public comment on the Advanced Corridor Plan on September 6, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Fridley City Council received additional public comments at its September 25, 2000 regular council meeting; and WHEREAS, the statute requires the city to either approve or disapprove the submitted Advanced Corridor Plan; and WHEREAS, the statute requires the city to specify the amendments or conditions by which, if resolved, were to remove the city's disapproval; and WHEREAS, the city acknowledges that the NCDA Board, by policy, has suggested a third option of "approval with conditions"; and WHEREAS, the city must act in accordance with state statute; and 71 WHEREAS, the city acknowledges that the NCDA has attempted to address as many issues as possible given that the level of design is equivalent to 10%; and WHERAS, the Environmental Impact Statement has not been released for public comment; and WHEREAS, the city finds that a commuter rail system in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area will help reduce traffic congestion and will help promote increased use of public transit systems; and WHEREAS, the Northstar Corridor Development Authoriry's Advanced Corridor Plan has prompted a public discussion of the proposed station location and station design in Fridley; and WHEREAS, there was significant concern expressed about the size and location of the park and ride facilities on both the east and west side of the railroad tracks; and WHEREAS, there was significant concern expressed about the additional traffic, especially "cut through" traffic, through adjacent residential neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, there was significant concern expressed about whether a station was appropriate within and/or near a residential neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the City suggested several changes to the site design of the proposed station; and WHEREAS, a different location of the station was suggested by the public south of I-694; and WHEREAS, the NCDA reported that a station could not be located farther south of the I-694 because of the location of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe main switching and operation yards; and WHEREAS, the NCDA responded with a revised site plan stamped "preliminary draft" and dated September 20, 2000; and WHEREAS, there was significant concern expressed by residents of the adjacent neighborhoods within'/2 mile of the station that the additional sound generated by whistles> bells, and other warning devices on the trains would detract from the livability and enjoyment of their properties; and WHEREAS, there was significant concern expressed by the residents of the adjacent neighborhood about the potential increase in crime associated with the park and ride facilities and the proposed underpass; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley assumes that there will be monitoring cameras at all stations and that the NCDA will construct a central security control facility to monitor the activity of the commuter rail operation (similar to the control facility in Oceanside, California) at a station site along the proposed route; and WHEREAS, the Ciry of Fridley encourages development on the four-acre site, on the east side of the railroad tracks, with uses that would be compatible with the residential neighborhood, commercial neighborhood, and the commuter rail station; and 1NHEREAS, there has been significant concern expressed by the residents of the City of Fridley that the commuter rail station area be properly maintained and meet the City Code requirements for exterior maintenance for similar types of land uses; and WHEREAS, the signal at 61S` Way/East River Road was installed at the request of School District No. 14, and School District No. 14 pays for the annual operation of the signal; and 72 WHEREAS, the statutory process mandates that the City choose between 100% acceptance of the proposed station or "disapproval" with an itemization of all potential changes without the benefit of the Environmental Impact Statement and a higher level of design work; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley finds it extremely difficult to make specific comments and suggestions about the Advanced Corridor Plan when, in fact, there are a number of questions still outstanding that will be addressed in the forthcoming environmental impact statement or preliminary engineering phase of the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley hereby disapproves the station design as submitted by the Northstar Development Corridor Authority as submitted in the Advanced Corridor Plan transmitted to the City on August 4, 2000. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley encourages the NCDA and the Commissioner of Transportation to evaluate possible station locations within Fridley that might create less impact on residential neighborhoods. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if the station is located at 61S` Avenue/615` Way, the City of Fridley places the following conditions on the City's disapproval: • The site plan dated September 20, 2000 is the preferred design alternative • The southerly driveway on the east side parking lot shall be a right turn only • The northerly driveway on the east side parking lot shall be shared with the development on the remaining 4 acre parcel • The proposed storm water management system shall meet the City of Fridley requirements. • The storm water pond on the east side may be sized to accommodate the run off from the 4- acre parceL � A detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted prior to construction meeting City requirements for parking lot and neighborhood screening. • A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted prior to construction meeting City requirements for lighting near residential areas. • The Ashton Avenue connection shall be platted as a public right of way. • The Ashton Avenue connection to 615t Way shall be designed such that the roadway is 30 feet wide and is one way from 62"d Way to just south of the proposed pond. • Access points to Ashton Avenue shall be consolidated to minimize tra�c disruption. • The underpass shall be designed with the "switchback" on either side of the railroad tracks. � Sidewalk and bikeway connections as shown on the September 20, 2000 plan shall be constructed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley requests the Commissioner of Transportation, the NCDA, and the Burlington Northem/Santa Fe to work with the appropriate state and federal authorities to minimize, if not eliminate, all train whistles and bells within the city limits of Fridley including, but not limited to, train crossings and stations. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley requests the NCDA to review appropriate means to reduce and to mitigate the noise from any rail operations as a result of negative impact findings in the Environmental Impact Statement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ciry of Fridley encourages the Commissioner of Transportation to locate the central security control facility as an anchor tenant of a building on the four-acre site on the east side of the railroad tracks. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley requests the Minnesota Depa�tment of Transportation arrange for the appropriate maintenance and operation of the commuter rail station in orde� to meet the City of Fridley's code requirements for outdoor maintenance. 73 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley require the Northstar Corridor Development Authoriry and the Commissione� of Transportation to submit all applications for land use issues (street and easement vacations, plats, and others) to the City of Fridley for review as is typically completed by other developers. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ciry of Fridley reserves the right to place stipulations and conditions on any land use applications as is rypically done for other developers. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ciry of Fridley reserves the right to install traffic control signage, as it deems appropriate on public streets around the station area. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley requests the Commissioner of Transportation, the Northstar Corridor Development Authority, and the appropriate governmental agencies to review • the benefiting parties of the signal at 61 S` Avenue/East River Road with a view towards the operation ' of the signal being undertaken by the general transportation funds of some governmental agency. ` BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley requests the Commissioner of Transportation to evaluate the current statutory process and to recommend a change to the legislature permitting approval of Advanced Corridor Plans by municipalities after more information is availabfe. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley requests the NCDA to respond to the issues contained in this resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 9'}' DAY OF OCTOBER 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA SKOGEN, CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR � passenger Page 2 of 4 • Northstar Cortidor . Red Rock Corridor • Dan Patch Corridcr �ommuter Ra�� System P�an � . . .r� . p ___..____.._� ___ � _ � , �-_ . .� _ ._ .. _ , . 4.� t - _ ,. � .�_ .. ,_,, N��c�aa ° : _L ; ��.,�.:x ..:.,. Be1Aei corr�ao. i __ - w,.w M' •1., 1 �� _ 1 � � �� }." � -'� � � . . L \ "',r.✓+`"'�„� ` °..� w,.w : ; [ ax:�3::s. j�' ,:'� _ _ ��''� .,... I . 1 1 � ; . �� `�lirY� K .. . � . :' �� 1y � � � -•.ti � � 4 � �- 14i« #Y .�N � . . ��'� . . � . x �" ,,,, � _ � ' � : v. i . qY: : , p�� /�� i� .. � .a� , f t f� i, �11 fWii� {IMffWi . t . , �`- t t . . ! t. �- � . .� . �.h iss+tsr i � � �f . _..._ . �.. _ _ u:'�e.tisT�er�t. �`� =. - f ._�_f�R' -. __ __ . �..�� .� .' ..,` _�__ _--__. ..._. _ _ . ._ -� � .� �+ ��,.. � _M.._ - 9� �r` `'�`... _"�. �4��x.. f .-!'�� ri0(i1dOI �':..�,, �` - -- � '-`""' ' Nawaod�oung Amenca .� _ _ ` . _ � _.____. ._ — _._.�--.-�.G°� i...._ f ... _., �- Red Rocic � _ � , � - caRidoF ,r ,,. � f _ . � _.,., Y.�.rs.� .r..c.c ` "�... ,. . �._ . - Das:Patch Carridnr, � .—. � ._ , .,.... _. - . . ---- �, - .. : ., .. _...._ t -- -- LFGEIiD �• �or Cot�tidor •�sa- � /Ywmglk,�tricrs � fe�mrd torridot aed :!� RO[�l �dltid0i w�ew� RYS� �AflidW �� M bldl �OfT�Of e� a� a.s. �(WitdM Midwest Regional Rail System � .�, u��r � :�-s _ p -- -,s a �� The Midwest Regional Rail System (MWRRS) is a cooperative, multi-agency effor develop a nine-state, 3,000 mile regional passenger rail system. It wil! offer businf and leisure travelers sho�ter travel times, additional train frequencies, connections between urban centers and smaller communities. In Minnesota, Midwest Rail includes 140 miies of rail line near the Minnesota-Wisc boarder that could accommodate train travel speeds of 11 Q miles per hour. Today one train brings passengers from Minnesota to Chicago in about eight hours travel With Midwest Rail, Minnesotans could travel to Chicago on an additional 6 trains ir http://www. dot. state.mn. us/ofrw/passenger. html r 5/31 /00 0 �1r.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.�.� i r �� r� � . i ir ;; : n�.�-�� ` . �.�.. ( r+oud !-•-._ _._. ' � � •.r.-.._ ,aRr' • s i ' , � ,-w'+ ;� 1 � '`� � va��++cia+ � �._ _._._. � � � r � NAf�SY � i►E�+Es� 1 "+ ..i.� t ''� i � «�w..�rs:, i `• F;' _.r._ _._._._.; �:�•� � ' "; '""' ! i , � � r � � �t � i i_.� _.�,�.� � �• J r.�` 1 f � � ��R .�...��., ,�•�� " 4 � rCs:++i: �� T �qi.l'� e � i�...1�..�.�1. � I.ti� � —•� r. 1 �A�� ; . ��'� isCtit � `i �� r•—•—•—•—•--i � y� � � 1 I . ._. � � � �.. e � .�rr.�.�.n►+s... .. , n. �;t^. . .. +�'i' : `4i � 1 QAI[OtA t +v+�i�}1 i+r i r+ C!' 2Ei E:iq�'(k, t 1aH r.DMlttt� 71�1;�, �T;�Y RWTC L.QCa1' IGttGy http://www. dot. state. mn. us/newsrels/98101 Orail. gif t ., 6/1/00 r i. � , ,. CO D OP �I' •' I� •'� � Date: 10/5/00 � To: William W. Burns, City Manager �'� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director RE: Letters from Residents regarding Commuter Rail Site Bill, attached are copies of additional letters regarding the commuter rail site. Two of the �ee letters requested that I forward the comments on to the Council for receipt into the �'�°ti.. The third letter was a request for information on whether Fridley or the state has °;I�:;tQ::�essen the noise levels that the commuter trains will in �;:.;.::.;:.:;.;:.;::.:;.;. cause the azea. I will �:;;;;;�:�hat the EIS should address the noise im acts and whether noise miti ation will be ;��;;:.;:,.;>:: P g ��::;:::>':<::::. ;<>.....:;:.�:.:;.:;;:�:....`;:::< :<.:::;:�n and Cazol Hughes, 6424 Ashton Avenue :;'::.:;;:;�.:::::::::.;>;:;>::� . ;..;.:;��ms and Doris Kr.utson�, 6300 Starlite Blvd. <:'::>:::`:r«::::::>;;:: ..::;;Delora Kristian, 6771 Plaza Curve `�'I�anks Bill! •! l .f , � � 7 / -� �u�u� °�'�� SS5�3 � =2G/ 20�d ' ,�?�� G�2�'`�G�GL oQC� o � . - _ - _ _- _- = --, ' ��-y� . �/ - . _ . �'�- �� .� �� ,;�ci� ./n �'�--� " .�� i , � - , r �if�Z�✓� �i�� .�C�i�� i '� ��z�il�i�Z�/ ` [ �J �� v �v � � �.. ; � �� . � - ;x_ � � � " ' =. i � September 29. 2000 Ken and Caroi Hughes 6424 Ashton Avenue Northeast Fridley, Minn. 55432 Barb Dacy Fridley Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue Northeast Fridley, Minn. 55432 Dear Barb, This letter is in regard to the commuter rail depot that has been proposed for our neighborhood. It was stated at the last council meeting, that we can say that we do not want the depot at the proposed location, but we must give reasons why, so tha.t these problems can be dealt with. We do not want the depot as it will destroy two neighborhoods. This was stated clearly at the informational meeting, and the planning commission meeting, and also the last council meeting. The proposed site doesn't work for the neighborhoods. A better site would be south of 694. You say that can't be done due to the railroad yards. It was suggested at the planning comrrfission meeting by one of the other neighbors that the site on the west side be mvved south of the insuiation factory. �Vhen you and I spoke recently on the phone regarding this site, you said that there could not be a signal light that ciose to 61st and the signal light at 61 st had to stay because of the school needing a controlled crossing. At the last council meeting, a resident who has to take a Ieft turn offof Riversedge Way to go North on ERR, was complaining that he has trouble now making this turn due to the heavy traffic. He felt that it would be next to impossible to make this turn once the traffic is added due to the depot. Mayor Jorgenson assured him that a signal light would be installed if this were the case. My husband and I drove this area just to see the distance between 61 st and Riversedge Way. We then measured the distance between 61 st and the area south of the insulation factory. The distance between Riversedge Way and 61 st is actually shorter than the distance between 61st and the property that is south of the insulation factory. Seeing that the Mayor has said that a signal light could be put at Riversedge Way, It would seem that one could be put at the corner of the site that we are suggesting. We see many reasons for this location to be considered over the present one on the West side. There would not be the congestion in front of the school. There would not be such commotion by the offices of the insulation factory(which are on the north end.) There would be no reason for traffic to exit Mississippi onto Ashton as a shortcut in the mornings to the depot. There would be no need to make any changes to our roads in our neighborhood. People exiting the Park and ride would exit onto ERR, rather than drive through the neighborhood as it would be shorter for them. The Park and Ride would be directly across from the Park and ride on the East side of the tracks. The walk through tunnel could be connected directly to the East side without a long walk area. You made the concessions to the East side by giving them the lazge buffer to the north and by putting more of the parking spaces on the west side. Why not do something for the West side and use the site south of the insulation factory. Land needs to be purchased anyway. What difference does it make if you take it from a business rather than a resident? To sum this up, we'd rather not have the depot in our neighborhood at all. We'd rather have it south of 694. If the commuter rail people insist that we do have the depot in our neighborhood, it would seem that the site south of the insulation factory is a better choice. P(ease enter this letter as part of the conespondence regarding the commuter rail depot. Also, please drive to the site and check out the area we are talking about. It seems like this area south of the insulation factory is the only logical site, if you insist that the depot has to be in our neighborhood. Thank you for your time in this matter. ~� �� Sineertely, �f �J J� � G� Ken and Carol Hughes cc Ann Bolkcom m � U I� .� r a+� � I � �� _�.�. � �rM1�1t � � /� N � � 0 1-•� / o° � F--1 r� �� d � � H "� � 1�1 o� z r- Z � od � �� D C) --� � $ � m r�� ? 1M7�0 _ � �� f , ,- f I ��_. � I { � _ .. f. ..�. � ` � � { �, �� U r _ MMNN ' • Y V • `\ V �r �� `� �'� -- � ; �n ��_� �I tJ�J l�- �_ � a � � D Z t7 A C � � � � D m c N � A � 2 Gl D .zi � a N � � a �L . - � ,� � �, .■ _ , � _ 1 � � r � � a � � b � �,rw+uu •• � Q � �' � v ��r 7� Z �. � �� .�C � �� r� � _ -�..`-_--- - _ 7-'� �-�+-"'_��'� � �.. -- ` i — � 1, I It N � I A v� rt "� D � � m - IA < � � � � < ~ � � ro � � A �. '"� p. . I N . �. N ' I I { � \ s� � .� �.� �` _ _ �� y TKµ„E} � ` ; � � r a A� o ro � � ; °o� � N Q�p_._. ♦- - iJ1 _ o � n� a.'� �� r f"' �� oa 8 �� i I I I ' I 1 i I 1 I I l t�• � I I �� N � � A � Z ci � Q� ty D � � D I N y � a � y D � �� l I � _� o �y N� fDi "q O Z OD D H `. 2 � � � � � M C m � � 0 N D � N � \ W � m E D -t •�� s,�. �� r . 6300 Starfight Blvd. Fridley, MN 55432 September 30, 2Q00 Barbara Dacy, AICP Community Development Director Fridley Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue, N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Re: Commuter Rail Dear Barbara: Some concems that we still have after attending the City Council meeting on September 25 are as follows: 1. Not nearly enough consideration pertaining to traffic, noise, etc., is being given to the Sylvan Hills residential area in the planning of this (proposed) rail station. Even the draft (map) does not show Trinity Drive in SyNan Hills, which is directly in line with Main, on the north side of 61�`. This will be a °straight shoY ior tra�c coming off Main, as +nrell as that which will use Starlight Blvd. We wonder why so little is being said about the above, with so much attention being given to the convenience, aesthetic issues, etc. of the rail station. We have lived at this address over 35 years, as have many of our neighbors, and we feel as though we are being betrayed by the city. 2. We do not feel comfortable with what was said about the train homs/whisttes. What might be the case today may very well be changed at any time. Also, the bells/homs of the commuters will be loud enough, and we believe the regular train traffic will use their horns much more often, to be on the safe side. If this station is to be built, we need a sound barrier! 3. We are not in favor of moving the parlcing lot closer to 61 �, as was suggested at the meeting. This will cause even more of a nuisance to residents. 4. If the proposed tunnel is open 24/7 it can and will promote situations that are not acceptable to either this area or the City of Fridley, as a whole. The criminal element is a major concem. If the station is completely automatic and there will be vending machines, etc., it goes without saying what that will promote. Our entire neighbofiood will be at risk. 5. Decrease in property value is also a major concem. 6. As you are aware, and as the enclosed maps indicate, there is a Bethel to downtown Minneapolis line proposed, although this seems to have been "skipped ove�' at the meetings we have attended. Although it is said to be a long range plan, it seems quite likely that it may be implemented sooner, and we believe people should be aware of this. If a rail station is established at the proposed location, it will, without a doubt, dramatically change our entire neighbofiood. If having the station in Fridley is that important, then what is to be said of long time residents who have contributed in one way or another to the growth of Fridley? Are we to be totally ignored? Please forward these concerns to the City Council prior to the October 9 meeting. We need to be out of town the week of October 2 but hope to be back in time for that meeting. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, G`��i = . 1t'�r-l.�Gr L%Z!/� �� s and Dons Knutson Enclosures: DOT Transportation Fact Sheet and Commuter Rail System Plan � 1 ransportation Fact Sheet, COMNiUTER RAQ, Page 1 of 2 ,, , �°�r. � �� '�� ; -► Office of Government Relations Home Page E-mail Us Your Legislative Questions NtnlDOT Home FAQ J�i? i��^r J ;::. �� Info�DOT .�'�' ��'f�!��`. COMMUTER RAIL Effective 2/1/00 TRANSPORTATION FACT SHEET Overview After three years of study, vWDOT released its commuter rail plan for the Tw-in Cities. The plan calls for the first line built to run from St. Cloud to downtown 1�tinneapolis. By 2020 this line is expected to carry over 10,000 trips per day, or more than 2.8 million trips per year. Commuter rail service will be provided by diesel hauled coaches that run primarily on existing freight rail tracks in existing rail corridors during peak commute hours only. The approximatety 80 mile route is expected to go into service in 2003. Commuter rail service is designed to have relatively few stops and will carry relatively lon� distance commuters. After the first line is built, other lines being proposed would run from Hastings to St. Paul and from Lakeville to �linneapo(is. A line between downtown St. Paul and downtown Minneapolis will also be built as part of the Hastings line development. Long range plans anticipate other lines will connect Forest Lake to downtown St. Paul , one line from Norw•ood- Young Arrierica and another from Bethel to downtown Llinneapolis E�cplanation of Process In 1997 the vlinnesota Le,islature directed �1n�DOT to conduct a feasibility study for commuter rail. That Phase 1 study identified 6 corridors out of the19 corridors evaluated that had the greatest potential for commuter rail service. The legislature subsequently directed Mn/DOT to conduct Phase 2 of the Twin Cities Commuter Rail Feasibility Study in 1998. Based upon a number of performance criteria, this study recommended a staged construction of a commuter rail system, beginnin� with the line that runs from Elk River to downtown Minneapolis. Parallel to the Phase 2 study, a feasibiliry study of estab(ishing commuter rail service between St. Cloud and Minneapolis, the Northstar Corridor Study, was being conducted. Between Elk River and �Iinneapolis, the Northstar follows the same corridor recommended in Phase 2 of the commuter rail study. As a result of these studies, officials at i�TnlDOT proposed to make the Northstar Corridor the first commuter rail line in the Twin Cities. Frequently Asked Questions What is the difference between commuter rail and li�ht rail? http://www. dot. state. mn. us/govreUpositionstatementslcommrail. html 6/ 1/00 / AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CRY OF FRIDIEY Date: 10/4/00 � To: William W. Burns, City Manager �!� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director RE: Resolution Authorizing Comprehensive Plan Amendment to include a "Station Area Plan" regarding the proposed NCDA Commuter Rail Station (CPA #00-01) REQUEST The Comprehensive Plan Amendment application has been initiated by the City of Fridley in response to the proposal by the Northstar Corridor Development Authority (the NCDA) to locate a commuter rail station in Fridley. The �urpose of the plan amendment process is to consider the elements of a"station area plan" at the locarion proposed by the NCDA, and to recommend basic "principles" or guidelines to be included in the City's updated Comprehensive Plan. While preparing the "station area plan" for review by the Planning Commission, staff also prepared the attached report that evaluates the "bigger picture". The report analyzes whether the commuter rail project itself is a benefit to the community, and second, the reports analyzes whether having a starion within the City is appropriate. Also attached is the proposed "starion area plan" language which would be included in the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission concurred with the findings of staff regarding the location of a commuter rail station site in Fridley, and recommended that the City Council consider the draft Station Area Plan attached for inclusion into the City's Comprehensive Plan. A resolution is attached for Council adoption. Further, the Planning Commission recommended to the Council that staff develop an overlay or special zoning district to guide development in and around the station area. ! � •. M-00-166 75 RESOLUTION NO. -2000 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGARDING A STATION AREA PLAN FOR THE NCDA COMMUTER RAIL STATION SITE WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (Minn. Stat. 473.851 through 473.872, as amended) requires local government units to prepare and submit plan amendment applications to the Metropolitan Council, when changing the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley initiated a plan amendment application as filed as CPA #00-01 in the City offices; and WHEREAS, the City determined that it was necessary to promulgate the plan amendment to establish appropriate planning principles for issues within the station area around the proposed NCDA Commuter Rail station site; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment #00-01 on September 6, 2000; and WHEREAS, the plan amendment language will be included in the new draft of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the proposed draft of the Comprehensive Plan is under review by the Metropolitan Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley hereby approves the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPA #00-01, as found on file in the City offices. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 25T" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA SKOGEN, CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR �� STATION AREA PLAN NORTHSTAR COMMUTER RAIL PROJECT PROPOSED COMMUTER RAIL FACILITY The proposed commuter rail station is located on both sides of the railroad tracks at 61�` Avenue/61s` Way. The area under evaluation totals about 12 to 14 acres, with about 12 acres on the east side of the tracks and about 2 acres on the west side. A pedestrian underpass below the railroad tracks would connect both sites. Based on NCDA 20 year projections, a station in Fridley would require between 600 to 700 parking spaces in addition to bus services and drop off facilities (known as "kiss and ride"). STATION AREA DESCRIPTION A"station area" is typically defined as the area around a transit facility up to %z mile around the station itsel£ Under this definition, the station area extends from Mississippi Street on the north, I-694 on the south, the Mississippi River on the west, and the University Avenue corridor on the east. The '/z mile radius has been documented as a rule of thumb for the distance that pedestrians would walk to a transit site. It is worthwhile to analyze what exists within this area (land uses, streets, bikeways/walkways etc.), and also to establish what principles or guidelines the City should use when evaluating land use or other transportation issues within the station area. The influence of the station, however, extends beyond the '/z mile radius. It is projected that the Fridley station may draw from a broader area north of I-694 to Osborne Road and further east to western New Brighton. EXISTING CONDITIONS The area contains 280 acres, in which there are over 960 residential parcels and 68 commercial and industrial parcels. There are over 400 single-family units, several major apartment complexes (Georgetown, Hyde Park, etc), and several larger size commercial and industrial properties. The station site is located almost dead center within the range of industrial properties along Main Street in the City. It is estimated that there may be as many as 1600 employees in the 'h mile station area. Within 1 mile of the station, there are several major employers. The new Medtronic World Headquarters is under construction with a potential employee base of 4,000 people, the Great Northern Industrial Park is just south of I-694, and the United Defense facility is just to the south of the Great Northern Industrial Park along East River Road. About 23,000 employees come to Fridley each day. The exact percentage of employees from the north who would use the proposed rail project is not known; however, employers on Main Street have reported that there are sizable portions of their employee base that live in northern communities like Anoka and Elk River. 77 A majority of the eacisting property within the Station Area is fully developed. In addition to the residential and industrial uses identified above, Stevenson Elementary is located within the station area as well. as several institutional uses like the Municipal Off'ices, churches, park facilities, most notably the Mississippi River associated parks, and a significant amount of commercial uses. The Cub Food and 57th Avenue corridor has recently been improved and redeveloped. The Columbia Pazk Medical facilities are also within the station area. The I-694/University Avenue intersection is a major gateway to the community and the City is evaluating redevelopment projects at that intersection. PRINCIPLES OF STATION AREA PLANNING It is well documented that a transit station can provide a service to a neighborhood, and that the neighborhood can support a transit station. In order to accomplish efficient bus services, a sufficient amount of densiry needs to be achieved to make the bus system worthwhile running. Because the existing single-family densities in the station area are about 4 units to the acre, and because apartment densities range from 4 to 15 units/acre, it comes as no surprise that University Avenue supports a fairly successful express and regular route service. In the same manner, the commuter rail station site can provide a service to the immediate '/z mile area and what happens within the station area can also serve to bolster the rail service. Further, what is not known about the impact of the commuter rail service is the amount of "reverse commuters", those who work in cities to the north but live in Fridley. Therefore, it is worthwhile to identify the overriding goals for land use, transportation, and housing issues within the station area. There are three typical principles to station area planning: Mixed and compact land uses: Identify the appropriate land uses that generate ridership, pedestrian activity and reduce dependence on the automobile. 2. Enhanced Environment: Create a station environment that is attractive and safe. 3. Supportive Access Patterns: Provide direct connections to the station site for all modes of transportation while minimizing intrusion on the existing neighborhoods These principles certainly apply to the Fridley location; however, because the site is bisected by the tracks, and the east portion of the facility is located more in the middle of the neighborhood as opposed to the edge, another principle of "neighborhood compatibility" is warranted. Another principle is suggested: : 4. Neighborhood Compatibility: Insure that new development or redevelopment is compatible with the surrounding character of the area while insuring that it supports the function of the station site. Mixed and Compact Land Use: There is the potential for new development on the east side of the railroad tracks. The size of the area may in fact deternune the land use. The City should evaluate new uses against the following issues: 1. The appropriate density, if residential. 2. Consider mixed uses if possible where small retail services can be combined with residential units. 3. Evaluate using the development to screen the visual impacts of the park and ride lot. 4. Evaluate incorporating NCDA facilities, the security/control center, into the development. 5. Consider developments which satisfy neighborhood or community housing or commercial needs. 6. Establish a new overlay or special zoning district to define the appropriate guidelines and standards to control development or redevelopment around the station site. Enhanced Station Nei�hborhood Environment In order to create a station that is safe and attractive, attention must be paid to a number of factors. The park and ride lots themselves must be designed so that they are well lit, accessible, and maintained appropriately. Moreover, the City should consider the following: 1. Establishing clear connections to existing sidewalks/bikeways. The connections to the facilities along the Mississippi River offer an attractive resource. Further, the east west system on 61S` Avenue connects to the remaining heart of the Fridley trail system. 2. Identify new pedestrian connections. For example, the Parks and Open Space Chapter identified a need for a pedestrian/bikeway facility on the west side of Main Street between 57`h Avenue and the station site. 3. Consider establishing decorative fencing to be consistent with other improvement projects in the City. 4. Consider establishing informational improvements to direct visitors to trail connections, significant points of interest to the Mississippi River, nearby shopping areas, or major employee centers. Supportive Access Pattem The access pattern to the station site should be direct and safe. Automotive traffic on the east side should be kept as much as possible on 615t Avenue and Main Street. The NCDA 79 should establish as many measures as necessary to inhibit commuter traffic cutting through the neighborhood. The City may want to consider establish a tra�c calming program to encourage slower speeds and to direct traffic to the major collectors. The city has an extensive existing pedestrian and bikeway system. 61St Avenue has sidewalks on both sides and 57`h Avenue was recently reconstructed with a sidewalk on the south side. A new bikeway /walkway facility is now located paralleling the railroad tracks on the west side, and there are facilities along East River Road. The City should consider adding the following: 1. Establishing an off street facility on the west side of Main Street. 2. Expanding the sidewalk on the south side of 61 S� Avenue. 3. Development design should provide for pedestrian and biking and create supportive atmospheres for the facilities. 4. Prioritize access to the station site as follows: • Pedestrian — bicyclist . g� . C� 5. Establish program to coordinate employee van pooling or other service to access employers in Fridley and Columbia Heights who may want to take advantage of the reverse commute. Nei�hborhood Compatibility The station area is a well established network of existing neighborhoods. Prioritizing transit usage over automotive use is the preferred hierarchy. It should be remembered however that the station site should be adequately sized for some time to come for anticipated traffic demand. Commuter rail parking within the neighborhoods would not be tolerable. Therefore it is necessary that the station design and any development as a result should be kept in scale and character of the neighborhood. The existing zoning on the east side is M-4, Manufacturing Only. Prior to this zoning district, the property was zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. Distribution centers and other uses requiring high amounts of truck traffic would have been pernutted. The M-4 zoning would still allow industrial uses, which may have a lot of truck traffic, but the use would be limited to manufacturing. The park and ride facility certainly does not have the extent of impacts that could have occurred with industrial uses including: outdoor chemical storage (as now exists in the station area), high intensity lighting, potential for odors and fumes associated with manufacturing processing, noise from truck traific, visual impacts of trucking doors or outdoor storage, industrial fencing or screening, and outdoor industrial activities such as rail spur loading and unloading. The park and ride site itself is also limited in hours of operation to just the peak commuting times in the early morning and late afternoons. This compares favorably with some industrial uses which operate three shifts. :1 IMPLEMENTATION The City should use the above four principles in evaluating any issues occurring within the station area. Further, the City should create an overlay or special zoning district to guide future development. Third, outside funding resources should be explored for any pedestrian, bikeway, additional transit service, or traffic calming improvement which may be determined as necessary for a successful station area. : COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT #00-01 PURPOSE OF PLAN AMENDMENT The Comprehensive Plan Amendment application has been initiated by the City of Fridley in response to the proposal by the Northstar Corridor Development Authority (the NCDA) to locate a commuter rail station in Fridley. The "Northstar" project is a commuter rail service from St. Cloud to Minneapolis, with about 12 stations strategically located along the route. The purpose of the plan amendment process is to consider the elements of a"station area plan" at the location proposed by the NCDA. In completing this analysis, however, it is necessary to consider whether the commuter rail project itself is a benefit to the community, and therefore, it is also necessary to consider whether having a station within the City is appropriate. There are several other processes that the NCDA and the Minnesota Department of Transportation must complete in order to initiate the project. One of these processes is called the "Advanced Corridor Plan" and is mandated by state statute. The Planning Commission has no formal role to review the "advanced corridor plan", but because the plan indicates a potential general layout to the station, staff has developed a list of recommended issues for the Commission to consider for recommendation to the City Council. The City Council must act on the Advanced Corridor Plan by October 23, 2000. BACKGROUND An informational meeting was held on August 2, 2000 and residents and businesses were invited to attend. The mailing list included properties located with'/Z mile of the proposed station. Transportation planners typically consider this radius as the "station area". About 75 residents attended. A demonstration ride was conducted on August 10, 2000. About 50 people from Fridley, business people and residents attended. HOW DOES FRIDLEY RELATE TO NEIGHBORING "STATIONS"? The major destination of the commuter rail line is downtown Minneapolis. The terminus is proposed at a site just north of the Target Center. About five trains will be headed southbound in the morning, with three trains traveling northbound for the "reverse- commute" (6:10 am through about 8:10 am). In the afternoon, the pattern is reversed, and there is one train in each direction over the noon hour. To the north of Fridley, the closest station is a site at Foley Boulevard where a park and ride facility currently exists for express busses. The stations are strategically placed along the corridor to provide adequate access to the system and are spaced far enough apart to allow for the train to : reach optimum commuting speeds. The proposed Fridley station is about 5 to 6 miles from the downtown location and 4.5 miles from the Foley Blvd. station. HOW DOES COMMUTER RAIL FIT INTO THE CITY'S FUTURE? The City is currently finishing the final draft of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. The plan contains a Transportation Chapter that describes existing conditions of roadways and other transportation modes and recommends certain goals and objectives to accomplish in the next 20 years. How does commuter rail fit into the plan? Is commuter rail an opportunity for the City and what are the benefits? If commuter rail is an opportunity, should the City approve a station site? If so, where should it be located? OpportunitV? It is estimated that there are about 200,000 "average daily trips" (cars and trucks) on I- 694 (135,000), TH 65 (38,000), TH 47 (38,000), and East River Road (19,000) in total. A small portion of that is truly attributable to traffic created from Fridley. A majority of it is "through" traffic. Fridley sits geographically at the "spouY' of the funnel of Anoka County. The morning commute southbound is heavy and the afternoon commute is also equally well traveled. This statistic does not include the trips on the major east west roadways. With four major highways in the City, the impacts from traffic noise, exhaust emissions, and truck tra�c is well documented. The future traffic projections portend more traffic totaling 275,000 ADT in the year 2020 on these four roadways; I- 694 (163,000); TH 65 (45,000); TH 47 (45,000); and East River Road (25,000). It should also be remembered that the NCDA is a joint powers organization which is not only pursuing the construction of the Northstar Commuter Rail project, but is also organizing an effort to coordinate other transportation improvements (feeder bus and existing highway improvements) in conjunction with the commuter rail system. It cannot be forgotten that the growth in northern Anoka County, Sherburne, and Benton has been one of the fastest in the country. It only takes a weekend trip to realize that Highway 10 and I-94 are congested at peak hours (see printed enclosures from NCDA). The current draft of the Transportation Chapter suggests that the TH 47 corridor should be maintained in its current status as a four-lane expressway as opposed to enlarging it to a 6-lane expressway. The plan also states: "Further, encouragement of transit ridership and alternative travel modes should help relieve traffic congestion on TH 47". Widening University Avenue would seriously alter the character and nature of the neighborhoods. While a specific number of trips has not been identified by the NCDA as to how many vehicles can be eliminated from going through Fridley, it stands to reason, that the commuter rail service would help to hold back the rapid increase in traffic through the communiry. Any additional increase in north south bus service would also further that end. The University Avenue right of way had been considered for a light rail route between downtown Minneapolis and Northtown. Funding issues, among others, delayed : implementation of the Northtown route. If commuter rail is pursued, and the NCDA receives funding, it is unlikely that light rail will be constructed in the immediate future. Increasing all forms of transit service is a focus of the plan. It suggests better east west transit service, several new connections for the city's bikeway/walkway system, and coordination and connections between commuter rail services, bus routes and major employers. The NCDA is proposing a pedestrian and bicycle underpass at 615� Avenue underneath the railroad tracks to connect two park and ride sites. The underpass represents a significant connection befinreen the park and trail systems on the west side of the tracks (the Islands of Peace Park and bikeway) to the east side of the community. The railroad is a significant safety and traffic barrier because a minimal amount of crossings are permitted. NCDA construction of this facility also saves the City the expense of completing it. The proposed commuter rail service is intended to operate on the existing railroad tracks, and construction of additional tracks is not necessary. The existing BNSF line is major rail route and there are 40 to 70 trains/day with an average length of 85 cars and 3 locomotives/train. Operating the rail service on the existing tracks not only saves public expense but also is an efficient use of existing resources. The other benefits to having a station for the commuter rail system include: • Provides residents and businesses an alternative to the automobile to travel downtown or places of employment to the north ("reverse commute") • Reduces vehicle trips, therefore resulting in lower emissions, which benefits air quality � Provides another mode of transportation which may reduce the necessity for highway expansion � Improved employee access to jobs • Provides a competitive advantage over non-rail communities • Businesses near stations realize tangible (customers) and intangible (visibility) benefits • Provides residents and businesses a means to connect to other transportation systems, Hiawatha Light Rail System, the airport, and ultimately to other commuter rail lines such as the Red Rock, Dan Patch, or others • Provides access to major facilities downtown and elsewhere on the corridor such as St. Could State University • Foley Blvd. Station provides access to Springbrook Nature Center In sum, there are benefits to the community as a result of the commuter rail system. The lack of a coordinated, significant regional transit system (either commuter rail, light rail, or increased bus service) does not help Fridley reduce or mitigate the impact of the automobile on the quality of life in the City. Second, residents and employees who live ., �• and work in Fridley will not only have a reasonable alternative to commuting by automobile, but also they will have access to a broader transportation system, which in the future (10 to 20 years) could ultimately prove to be very valuable. What are the drawbacks to the system? Are there negative aspects to the commuter rail service? The answer is twofold. The NCDA must complete the federal and state required processes for environmental impact studies in order to determine both the positive and negative impacts. The EIS is currently underway and the draft EIS will be released sometime this fall, according to NCDA officials. Additional hearings on the EIS will be conducted by the NCDA. As a result of the EIS process, the NCDA must determine appropriate methods to "mitigate" or reduce negative impacts. Second, an analysis of the impact/relationship of individual station locations on surrounding neighborhoods must also be completed. While the EIS process will evaluate a range of issues pertaining to station sites, another overlapping process, completed by the cities, is the "station area plan" which is the subject of this amendment. Station Area Plan Should the Citv have a station in the community, and if so, where should it be located? The City should take advantage of the benefits created by the commuter rail system cited earlier and approve a station site within the City, but at the same time make sure it is compatible to the surrounding neighborhood. The station site should be evaluated as any other type of development to determine its viability and compatibility with the surrounding area. A station area is defined as the area around the station site within about'/z mile. It is well documented from other studies that many people will walk to the station site within the'/2 mile radius. Some studies have shown that proximity to the station site is an attractive asset to a property, especially for multi-family properties. It is not dissimilar to the fact that many people like to live closer to a bus stop along Universiry Avenue. Conversely, it is documented that the amount and nature of "transit oriented" land uses help to support the viability of the station site. More about this is discussed later. The NCDA has undertaken an extensive site selection process for station locations, and the result of that analysis is the proposed station site at 61 St Avenue and 61 St Way. One of the criteria to select eligible sites was the availability of vacant land. Acquiring existing fully developed properties is more expensive and disruptive in comparison with acquiring and developing vacant land. There are three areas of vacant land along the railroad tracks in Fridley. The first is the Nature Center and some vacant industrial land near it. The second is the vacant parcels on 61 St Avenue and 61 St Way, the proposed station site. The third is the land area owned by the US Navy near United Defense. : The remaining land area is fully developed. The Nature Center site is simply too close to Foley Blvd. The United Defense site was investigated first, but because the rail yards in this location are extensive (20 to 30 set of tracks) and is very close to their major switching terminal, BNSF rejected the location. The remaining site at 61StAvenue and 61 St Way was the remaining choice, the track facilities are much smaller, about 4, and are immediately adjacent to vacant land areas. Any site further to the north begins to impinge on the service area of the Foley Blvd. Station. The site is in close proximity to East River Road and University Avenue, existing bus routes, and close to existing traffic signals. The proposed underpass creates the ability to utilize both vacant land areas on either side of the tracks. Platforms on either side of the tracks will be constructed to provide northbound and southbound service. The concerns about having a station at this location were expressed by the neighboring residents, especially from those on the east side of tracks. The concerns included traffic, noise, impact on property values and security of the neighborhood. A summarv of the written comments and the verbal questions and statements is attached. The NCDA has obtained studies that indicate positive economic benefits as a result of proximity to a station area. Studies in Boston and Philadelphia have apparently shown 6% increases in residential property values. In Fridley, it should be remembered however that it is impossible to differentiate between the losses of value attributable to commuter rail versus the loss to freight rail when the freight rail impacts exist already. What is a station area plan, and what should it sav? A station area plan sets out guiding principles or goals for the various aspects of the land area around the station site. It is suggested that the plan language, attached, should be incorporated in the City's draft of the Comprehensive Plan, and also, the City enact an "Overlay" District or "Special" District in its zoning ordinance to create specific requirements for development in and around the proposed station site. Because most of the land area around the site is developed, there would be no impact; however, if remaining vacant Iand exists or redevelopment takes place (none planned at this time!), there would be specific rules for the City to use to evaluate development proposals. Description of Proposed Station Site The site totals about 12 to 14 acres and spans both sides of the railroad tracks. The east side of the tracks would contain a 445-space parking lot with bus turn around and drop off facilities. The west side includes a 252-space parking lot. Ashton Avenue would no longer connect to 61St Way, and would instead turn into 61 '/2 Way. Two detention basins are proposed to handle runoff from the parking lots. Connections would be made to existing sidewalks and trail systems. An underpass is proposed to connect both sites and to provide access to either the north or southbound platforms. About 2.5 acres would remain vacant on the east side and about acres would remain vacant on the west side. While it is not certain if MnDOT or the NCDA would be :. responsible for owning and maintaining the facilities, the property occupied by the station area would become tax-exempt. The site on the east side is zoned M-4, Manufacturing Only, and the site on the west side is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. ADVANCED CORRIDOR PLAN COMMENTS At the August 2, 2000 informational meeting, the station area concept design was presented as well as an extensive overview of the proposed commuter rail system. The attached summary provides more detail, but there were two basic concerns about the proposed layout. They are: 1. Why can't more spaces be provided on the west side of the tracks versus the east side and therefore be less intrusive to the existing neighborhood? 2. What can be done to inhibit traffic shortcutting through the neighborhood north of 61 St Avenue? In response to these and other concerns, staff recommends the consideration of the following comments to forward to NCDA regarding the Advanced Corridor Plan. The Council, prior to forwarding to the NCDA, would review these comments: 1. Traffic impacts from the park and ride site on the east side of the tracks needs to be better addressed, and further investigation is warranted to address the following: a. Investigate the reduction of parking on the east side that is within a residential area versus the west side that is located in an industrial or transition area. b. Investigate separating the park and ride site on the east side from the neighborhood by pushing the park and ride lot further south in the site. c. Investigate different access modifications to deter traffic from cutting through the neighborhood including relocating driveways, restricted turning movements, installing appropriate signage (i.e. "No Through Traffic" sign), or creation of inedians or other traffic calming improvements. d. The access driveway to the east park and ride lot should be shared wi#h the remaining parcel. 2. The property dimensions of the site on the east side are not accurate and should reflect the land area immediately west of the Parson's Electric building. 3. The storm water management system should address the following comments: a. Underground ponding and treatments systems should be considered, especially for the west side of the railroad tracks. 87 b. The pond on the east side should be relocated away from 61 St Avenue and either located near the remaining developable parcel or located to the extreme southwest part of the parcel. c. A storm sewer system will have to be installed such that piping will have to extend from the new pond location to the southwest corner of the intersection at 61 St Avenue and Main Street. 4. The park and ride facilities should be designed in accordance with typical parking and landscaping requirements found in the City's commercial and industrial zoning districts. 5. NCDA must plat the property prior to installation of improvements. 6. On the west side of the tracks, consider increasing the amount parking, while maintaining the Ashton Avenue street connection to 61St Way. Further, consider the creation of "open space"/"trail stop resting" areas where the trail connects to the station area. 7. In order to address safety concerns, the NCDA should consider locating the "central control facility"/security building for the Northstar system on the east park and ride lot. Further, the building should be built large enough for another user that would provide a neighborhood/commuter customer service. 8. A pedestrian underpass connecting the two sites is essential. The City would prefer a facility however that is accessible 24 hours and contains a ramp underneath the tracks for bicyclists and pedestrians. 9. Provide pedestrian/bikeway connections to all existing facilities. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 1. There are short term and long term benefits to the City by supporting and encouraging the use of the commuter rail system. 2. The City should support having a station in Fridley. 3. The 61 St Avenue/61 St Way location is an appropriate location; however, the NCDA should investigate the suggestions cited above to address compatibility concerns of the neighborhood. Staff recommends the Planning Commission concur with the findings of staff regarding the location of a commuter rail station site in Fridley, recommend that the City Council consider the staff comments on the Advanced Corridor Plan, and recommend the Council consider the draft Station Area Plan attached. Further, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend to the Council that staff develop an overlay or special zoning district to guide development in and around the station area. NEXT STEPS The process will continue for seve�al more months. In order for the Northstar service to start in 2004, the following processes must be successfully completed: .. 1. Complete Advanced Corridor Process; review by the Commissioner of Transportation. 2. Completion of Environmental Impact Statement Process. 3. Completion of Preliminary Engineering. 4. Completion and award of funding from the Federal Transit Administration. 5. Completion of Final Engineering. Once the City has completed its comments on the Advanced Corridor Ptan, it is hoped that the NCDA will contact the City with the information to address the concerns regarding the station design. .. • � / AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 CITY OF PRIDLEY Date: 10/4/00 (� To: William W. Burns, City Manager �� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Re: First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Appendix A of the O-5, Telecommunication District to Create an Approved Site, ZTA #00-02, Qwest Wireless LLC PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission at its September 20, 2000 meeting unanimously recommended approval of ZTA #00-02 to create an "approved site" for telecommunications facilities. Qwest Wireless is proposing to locate a wireless antenna on top of a NSP pole in the Cheri Lane right of way, just north of Menards, subject to the following four stipulations: 1. The ground equipment shall be installed above grade with the vegetation proposed in the landscaping plan, and the landscaping shall be maintained by the petitioner. 2. Ground equipment and the cylinder on top of the pole shall be colored brown to match the MnDOT equipment. 3. The petitioner shall submit a copy of the joint use agreement with NSP to the city prior to the installation of the service. 4. No additional antenna may be installed on the subject NSP pole, other than the two proposed in the application. The staff recommendation to the Planning Commission was to recommend that the "ground equipment" be installed below grade. The Planning Commission felt that the proposed vegetation to screen the equipment was more appropriate than installing the equipment underground. The petitioner stated that the underground facility would have to be ventilated which would still require above ground equipment. Staff maintains its original recommendation, as found in the attached report. If technology and demand are such that these types of facilities will be located along the right of way, multiplied by several providers, the City should • � work aggressively to require the ground equipment be placed below grade to avoid the proliferation of all different types of boxes. RECOMMENDATION An ordinance authorizing the creation of an "approved site" at the subject location is attached. Should the City Council agree with the Planning Commission recommendation, their stipulations would apply as found in this memo. Staff recommends the Council require the equipment to be placed underground with the four stipulations as originally recommended by staff and found in the attached report. : � .. M-00-169 91 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, BY ADDING AN APPROVED SITE TO CHAPTER 205 "ZONING", TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS, SECTION 205.30, APPENDIX A. THE CITY COUNICL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 205.30 Telecommunications Towers and Facilities District, Appendix A, of the Fridley City Code is hereby amended as hereinafter indicated. Be and is hereby amended subject to stipulations adopted at the City Council meeting of October _, 2000. Section 2. The following locations are zoned to and have been determined to be Approved Sites for the installation of Towers or Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. • Municipal Garage or Recycling Center • Community Park • Edgewater Park • Fridley Reservoir along Matterhorn Drive • Fridley Water Tower in Locke Park • Fridley Commons Water Tower on 61 S` Avenue • Well #13 • Commons Park • Onan Corporation • AIITemp Storage • Agro-K • FMC Water Tower • Undeveloped City right-of-way south of 694 • Minneapolis Water Works • Minneapolis Water Works Pump Station • NSP pole in Cheri Lane riqht of wav PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS _TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000 ATl"EST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN, CITY CLERK 92 NANCY J. JORGENSON, MAYOR Public Hearing: October 9, 2000 First Reading: October 9, 2000 Second Reading: Published: 93 City of Fridley Land Use Application ZTA-00-02 September 15, 2000 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Qwest Wireless LLC. 426 N. Fairview Avenue. Room 101 St. Paul, MN 55104 Requested Action: To amend Appendix A of the O-5, Telecommunication District to create an additional "Approved Site" for wireless telecommunication facilities Purpose: To install a wireless telecommunication antenna on top of an existing NSP power pole Existing Zoning: Wood power pole located within the Cheri Lane right of way adjacent to Menards General Locations: 1200 Cheri Lane Existing Land Use: Wood power/electric pole. Sunounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Cherie Lane and I-694 E: C-3, Menards S: C-3, Menards W: C-3, Menards Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: The site is not cunently permitted as an approved site for telecommunications. Legal Description of Property: To be determined Transportation: Access from Cherie Lane Physical Characteristics: • ,. Area is cunently grass and planted trees maintained by Menards. SUMMARY OF PROJECT Qwest is proposing to locate a wireless telecommunication antenna on an existing NSP power pole. The existing pole height is about 37 feet tall. With the antenna, the height would be about 42 feet, exclusive of the 2 foot lightning rod. The petitioner states that the antenna because of a variety of technical issues cannot be located on existing approved sites. STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends approval of the site as an Approved site with stipulations. Staff recommends that the petitioner install the ground equipment below grade. CITY COUNCIL ACTION October 9, 2000 60 DAY DATE October 17, 2000 Staff Report Prepared by: Barbara Dacy �� _; �=�� A,�,_ ZTA #00-02 Background Qwest Wireless, LLC has iiled an application to amend appendix A of the O-5, Telecommunications Overlay Zoning District to create an Approved Site for installation of a wireless communication facility. Qwest proposed to locate an antenna on top of an existing NSP wood power pole in the street right of way for Cheri Lane adjacent to the Menard's commercial property. Le�al Basis for Review The O-5, Telecommunication District establishes several criteria to create a"Approved Site". The petitioner has examined these criteria and provided a response to each requirement. The O-5 District establishes the Approved Site process similar to a rezoning application, and requires a 4/Sths vote of the Council to approve an ordinance establishing the site in Appendix A of the District as an Approved Site. An approved site means that wireless telecommunication facilities are a permitted use, are reviewed by staff, and do not require further public hearings. Pronosed Construction Qwest proposes to replace the existing wood NSP pole with a new pole that would not only carry the overhead power line but also would have an wireless antenna on the top of the pole. The required ground equipment is also proposed at the base of the pole. A landscaping plan has also been submitted to screen the equipment. The proposed site is located just outside the Menard property line on the east side of the driveway entrance from Cheri Lane. The area in which it is to be located has been recently landscaped (when Menards finished their recent expansion) and contains a few trees, grass, and a small depression for storm water detention. Policy Issues The City has amended the O-5 District for overall system plans like Cell Net, which is an automatic meter reading system for electric meters. The ordinance was amended to permit these types of installations since the antennas were to be housed in small green boxes to be located on utility poles across the City. In this application, a smaller version of a"tower" is proposed on an existing structure in order to fill a coverage need for the company. The City anticipated that the time would be coming that more and more antennas are necessary due to demand by the public and the existence of a competitive industry. The future has arrived. 95 Upon initial contact, staff advised the petitioner to evaluate the existing Approved Site at Matterhorn Reservoir and the site at University Avenue and I-694. The petitioner claims that both of these locations are too far from the area that they want to provide coverage. The pole suggested as an Approved Site is approximately %2 mile from the Matterhom Reservoir, and at least 3/4`�s of a mile from the University/I-694 site. This application represents the frst formal request by the telecommunication industry to locate services on existing structures within the right of way, with the exception of Cell Net mentioned earlier. Another company named Metricom who provides internet data service may be requesting approval of a network of small antennas on light poles in the near future. There are advantages and disadvantages to the requested Approved Site: Pros: • Antenna is located on a structure that already exists • Co-locating two utility services on one structure • Capable of an additional "unipac" installation, according to the petitioner • Eliminates the necessity of a larger 125 foot monopole • Meets the intent of a majority of the Approved Site criteria Cons: • Ground equipment adds more visual clutter in the boulevards • Ground equipment adds more obstructions for maintenance/plowing • Additional antennas on poles may add more visual clutter along highways • Adding a second installation on the wood pole may look worse! The petitioner also submitted examples of other similar installations in other cities; pictures are included in the report. The petitioner's landscaping plan includes 6 foot tall techny arborvitae and other shrubbery to screen the ground equipment. One of the objectives of the O-5 District is to "minimize adverse visual impacts of Towers and Wireless Telecommunications Facilities through careful design, sitting, landscaping, and innovative camouflaging techniques". Instead of the landscaping option above ground, staff recommends that the ground equipment be placed below grade to eliminate the impacts of additional ground equipment in the right of way. If technology and demand are such that these types of facilities will be located along the right of way, multiplied by several providers, the City should work aggressively to require the ground equipment be placed below grade to avoid the pro�iferation of all different types of boxes. . � Staff Recommendation City Staff recommends approval of ZTA #00-02 to add an Approved Site to Appendix A of the O- S Telecommunication District with the following stipulations: 1. The ground equipment shall be installed below grade. 2. The petitioner shall obtain a right of way permit from the City to permit construction within the right of way. 3. The petitioner shall submit a copy of the joint use agreement with NSP to the City prior to installation of the service. 4. No additional antenna may be installed on the subject NSP pole unless ground equipment can be buried, and a structural engineer provides documentation that the pole can support another installation. �� r � CfTY OF FRIDLEY Date To: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 October 4, 2000 William Bums, City Manager ��° r� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Julie Jones, Planner/Recycling Coordinator Subject: Springbrook Phase II CWP Grant Application Background On August 21, 2000, staff presented the findings of the Springbrook Phase I Resource Investigation Grant to the Fridley City Council at a worksession. Staff reported at that meeting that the iindings of the report conclude that increases in the volume and the rate of storm water coming into the Springbrook Nature Center wetlands has caused the vegetation to die out. The vegetation is critical to the Nature Center ecosystem in that in provides habitat and also filters chemicals from the water before it travels downstream to the Mississippi River. The Final Report for the project included recommendations to implement a variety of improvements in the Springbrook Subwatershed that would allow restoration of the Nature Center wetlands with a total cost estimated to exceed $700,000. Staff informed the City Council that 50% of the project costs could be covered by a Phase II MPCA grant if the City applied by October 16, 2000. The Fridley City Council decided to hold a four-city council meeting to present the findings to the other cities and request funding assistance from them. The purpose of the meeting, which was held on September 11, was to request the Cities of Blaine, Coon Rapids, and Spring Lake Park to share in the 50% match requirement for a Phase II grant application. Staff presented a cost-sharing option at the September 11 meeting, which divided the required cash and in-kind match amounts fairly evenly among the four communities, with Fridley contributing twice as much combined cash/in-kind commitment as any of the other cities. The City of Spring Lake Park representatives requested that the cost-sharing percentages be revised according to each cities' contributing land area in the watershed. Representatives of the City of Blaine indicated that approval of over half of the costs would not likely be acceptable to the Blaine City Council. Staff revised the cost-sharing dollar amounts the next day according to contributing areas upstream of the Nature Center ponds, splitting Blaine's and Fridley's share evenly (see the attached spreadsheet). Then, Fridley staff began negotiating the details with each respective city's staff. . • Fridley staff also met with representatives of Springbrook Apartments and contacted Northtown Shopping Center about contributing to the project. One outcome of the negotiations with city representatives was agreement to allow each City Council to revisit the proposed projects that require further study before commencement of improvements. It is prudent to make sure that future projects are fully evaluated to ensure that each city is in agreement that the proposed improvements are a valid solution to the problem. Although this clause complicates coordination of the projects, staff found it to be a reasonable request. To date, the negotiations with Springbrook Apartments and Northtown have been positive. We expect to have the necessary details resolved by the Phase II grant application deadline. At the time of forwarding this memo to council, the City of Spring Lake Park and the City of Coon Rapids have each approved a resolution committing to the dollar amount commitments requested of them and shown on the attached spreadsheet. The City of Blaine will consider a resolution at their October 5 council meeting. Northtown has not yet responded, so the City of Blaine is proposing to split the $25,000 cash commitment requested of Northtown with the City of Fridley, increasing Fridley's cash commitment to $48,106.25. Since the proposed Phase II grant project will be a three-year project, this amount equals a$16, 035 cash commitment per year of the project for Fridley. If Northtown agrees to the $25,000 contribution, Fridley's total cash commitment is reduced to the $35,606.25 amount on the attached spreadsheet. Recommendation Staff is confident that we have negotiated the best possible cost distribution option for the City of Fridley. Without the opportunity of grant funds and cost-sharing from the other contributors to this project, the City of Fridley would be faced with the full $799,000 price tag of restoring the Springbrook Nature Center wetlands. The proposed option of completing the work for a$48,106 cash contribution and a$66,000 in-kind contribution is a far better option for the City. Staff recommends that the Fridley City Council approve the attached resolution authorizing the grant application and the city's contribution commitments. M-00-170 . . RESOLUTION NO. -2000 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING APPLICATION FOR MPCA GRANT FUNDS FOR THE SPRINGBROOK SUBWATERSHED STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT WHEREAS the Cities of Blaine, Coon Rapids, Fridley, and Spring Lake Park received Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) grant funds in 1997 and have used those funds to cooperatively complete a Phase I Clean Water Paitnership (CWP) Resource Investigation project in the Springbrook Creek Subwatershed; and WHEREAS the Springbrook CWP Project Advisory Committee has developed a plan for proposed Phase II storm water management system improvement projects, based upon the research and fmdings of the Phase I Investigation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Fridley hereby supports an application for MPCA Clean Water Partnership Phase IUSection 319 grant funds for the proposed Springbrook Subwatershed Implementation Project and agrees that the City of Fridley will be the Project Sponsor for the potential Phase II project and, in addirion, designates Julie Jones, Planner/Recycling Coordinator, to be the Project Representative for this project; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley that the City of Fridley will commit $48,106.25 in cash contriburions and $66,000.00 in in-kind contributions over the three yeaz term of a Phase II Springbrook Subwatershed Phase II Implementation Project, for completion of the proposed projects detailed in the Phase I Springbrook CWP Resource Investigation Grant Final Report to the MPCA. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY TffiS 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA SKOGEN, CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 100 C i .O r-+ � � � � U � � � � � � � Z � N � Y � Q � O V .� � �U � d � � L� � � � � � c= c°� o°o cn �p o •@ �ao�aoo �%± t� � I� O O m � M � M � O �, � �� -p O LL. � N o 0 0 0 � � CO a0 O CO � � � � � 7 �0 M � O O � C CO � � e- �� N � L 0 � U p, � cocov��l � c� rn v, �n � N � � � � � � U> M N N '� U � O ¢ U Y � a � � � Y Q � � J C C � C • o -p •` m U �i tn \ O 0 O O � � N N � d' N 0 O O � � � O M � n a� m � � w � C Y c � C f6 � N ca U o °o O O O tn � � u n a� a� c`o `m � � � � o °' Q t � � Y 0 0 z � � � C a � 0 O O lf') CO M � N � u m U C � � m v C Y c � C f6 s N ta U 101 � N tn � � N � N M Ch (O CO �t � I� 00 O CO � N M CO M L I� f0 � CO � y CO N M � � (0 tfi E!3 fiT d) � U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ri ri o v o M M O M O M M O M O � �t d' CO M CO � M �- Cfl �- N Y �3EflEflH9� C � � N �A � p � N � N M Ycoaicoo��° c o �- o •- `cfl — (O I� CO f� � � 0 � � � O �' O N N � !� � r' � � � � � U 0 0 0 0 Crl 00 M CO � � � � f� � 1� O M � M � � N a � � � Y Q � � J N � �' � c � � � m U ii cn � � CRY OF FR�LEY TO: FRO�VI: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 WII,LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER � � RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR AL FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE 2000 WEED ABATEMENT DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached you will fmd the fmal assessment roll for the 2000 Weed Abatement along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. The proposed assessment at 5805 3`d Street has been paid since the Public Heari.ng Notice was published. This leaves the assessment roll with 2 properties at a total cost of $354.11. The assessment will be certified for 1 year at an interest rate of 6.5%. RDP/sf Attachment 102 RESOLUTION NO. -2000 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR 2000 WEED ABATEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heazd and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the 2000 Weed Abatement. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, NIINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of one year, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2001, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6%2 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 103 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR 2000 WEED ABATEMENT Name PIN No. Actual Assessment Stephen & Vicki Van Leur 03-30-24-32-0011 $ 202.35 580 Faumont Street NE Fridley, MN 55432 Frank & Margaret D'aigle 03-30-24-32-0117 $ 75.88 14252 55� Street 03-30-24-32-0118 $ 75.88 Ro ers, MN 55374 650 Dover Street 104 � � CITY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 �� WII.,LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER � RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR AL FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE 2000 NUISANCE ABATEMENT DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached you will fmd the final assessment roll for the 2000 Nuisance Abatement along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. The assessment includes 4 properties at a total cost of $4,840.80. The assessment will be certified for 1 year at an interest rate of 6.5%. RDP/sf Attachment 105 RESOLUTION NO. -2000 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR 2000 NUISANCE ABATEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the 2000 Nuisance Abatement. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, NIINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of one year, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2001, and shail bear interest at the rate of 6'/z percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoprion of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 106 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR NUSIANCE ASSESSMENT Name PIN No. Actual Assessment Homeside Lending San Antonio 03-30-24-42-0093 $ 171.49 400 Chesterfield Center #100 238 Ely Street Chesterfield, MO 63017 Associates Home Equity 03-30-24-43-0034 $ 3,401.56 Services 170 Craigbrook Way 14415 South 50`h Street #100 Phoenix, AZ 85044 Peter & Margreth Mutua 170 Craigbrook Way Fridley, MN 55432 Frank & Margaret D'Aigle 03-30-24-32-0117 $ 51.45 14252 55� Street 03-30-24-32-0118 $ 51.45 Rogers, MN 55374 650 Dover Street Shelly Garber 24-30-24-24-0039 $ 1,164. 85 5800 Tennison Dr. NE Fridle , MN 55432 107 � � Clllf OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 WII,LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �� RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR AL FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE 2000 TREE ABATEMENT DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached you will fmd the final assessment roll for the 2000 Tree Abatement along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. The assessment includes 1 property at a cost of $2,288.13. T'he property owner has signed an assessment agreement that states the assessment will be certified for 5 years. The interest rate will be 6.5%. RDP/sf Attachment 1: RESOLUTION NO. -2000 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR 2000 TREE ABATEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heazd and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the 2000 Tree Abatement. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, NIINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of five years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2001, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6'/2 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the properiy tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 109 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR TREE ASSESSMENT Name PIN No. Actual Assessment William Lere 03-30-24-23-0050 $ 2,288.13 579 Hugo Street Fridley, MN 55432 110 AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 Gl'Y OF FRIDLE7 TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �` � FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE EAST RIVER ROAD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0.1995-4 DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached you will find the final assessment roll for the East River Road Improvement Project No. 1995-4 along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. The total cost to the City for this project is $3,654.18. The 3 properties in this project will be assessed at $10 per front foot for a total assessment of $3,130. The balance of the project costs of $524.18 will be paid from the Street Capital Improvement Fund. The assessment will be for 10 years at a rate of 6.5%. RDP/sf Attachment 111 RESOLUTION NO. _-2000 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR EAST RIVER ROAD IlVIPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1995-4 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the East River Road Improvement Project No. 1995-4. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten years, the iust of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2001, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6%z percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the counry auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 112 PRELMINARY ASSESSMENT FOR RIVER ROAD Il�ZPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1995-4 (LAFAYETTE TO I�IVIBALL) 113 r`�' :� t` ! �l _..-. . ��e�'„� ' i�' '"�' �r N.�: �1��`��i t,,!r�; tv., �;? � ,� t� �: C �r� � ti� � k�. �xq �D� �_� �► _�v-,, , u1 � � ,, ; , ,� , _� +.t.� -� �'> ..�"'" ii �� ;` . . � �. , � . , � � Y �. �.�Y�� . �'��t ..,�� i � ♦�^` ...�.,e�{ y , � . i �� r � � � �. �Y�r 'R �_:r M �s p' _ _fM� e�s 's.N1 � �fM�� M�.. �i . 'j '�M � � � .: � 1 if/�� I�� .. �0 , �i: t r'� �,,.�'"'``�.� � � � � j�Cr� ��' yr,��,�. t.r.� .r. �++! � �_ � :[�, � N� ` ��'� � F �` '" :t � �;� �----��,: • � ......-r-,. ,� �-,» � �� -�: ... � � � � �� ...i. . �i.�� ''*" � �'. 114 '.\ �� 3 � ,, '� .� M?�' IS � M a i _i 0 t" � s: ...•�.4 � ��. s ' ' k�. . � � a GTY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 TO: WII,LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER � �� FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE CENTRAL AVENUE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1998-4 September 26, 2000 Attached you will find the fmal assessment roll for the Central Avenue Improvement Project No. St. 1998-4 along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. The total cost to the City of this project is $885,474.10. The 23 properties in this project will be assessed at $9.63 per front foot for a total assessment of $129,856.91. The balance of the project costs of $755,617.19 will be paid from the Street Capital Improvement Fund and the General Fund. The assessment will be for 10 years at a rate of 6.5%. RDP/sf Attachment 115 RESOLUTION NO. -2000 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR CENTRAL AVENUE Il�IPROVEMENT PROJECT N0.1998-4 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the Central Avenue Improvement Project No. 1998-4. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, NIINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2001, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6 1/2 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF T'HE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 116 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR CENTRAL AVE Il�IPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.1998 - 4 Estimated Assessment for Actual Concrete Ctiub & Assessment Gutter Based on $9.63 Per Address PIN No. Front Ft $11 Per Front Ft Front Ft GUARANT'Y ESCROW OF MN INC I23024210031 7t9 7,887.00 S 6,904.71 4315 NORTH SHORE DR 7690 Crntral MOtJND MN 55364 ANDERSON TRUCKING 203 COOPER AVE N ST CLOUD MN 56301 KURT MFG CO INC 123024210007 370 4,070.00 S 3,563.10 5280 MAIN ST NE 7585 Central Ave MINNEAPOLIS MN 55421 BRENK BROTHERS PART. 1230242100030 2l0 2,310.00 S 2,02230 7490 CENfRAL AVE?IE Lot 3, Bik 1 FRIDLEY MN 55432 Friendly Chev BRENK BROTHERS PART. 123024240055 305 3,355.00 S 2,937.15 7490 CENTRAL AVE?fE Lot 2, Bik 1 FRIDLEY MN 55432 Friendly Chev PARK PLAZA EST LLP 123024240006 37t 4,081.00 S 3,572.73 2501 LOWRY AVE 7450 Cmhal Ave ST ANTHONY MN 55418 GUSTAVSON WALTER E& FLOYD 123024240042 l40 1,540.00 S. 1,348.20 74I0 CENTRAL AVE YE FRIDLEY MN 55432 HALUP'I'ZOK DERIIC 123024240022 194 2,134.00 S 1,868.22 7300 OLD CENTRAL AVE 7360 Crnhal FRIDLEY MN 55432 A� HALUPTZOK HAROLD V 16971 WARD LAICfi DR NW ANDOVER MN 55304 WALDCOH EDWARD & ROSE 123024240041 161 1,771.00 S 1,550.43 1228 l3'" S"C 7340 Crnual Ave NEW BRIGFTfON MN 55112 DETERMAN BROWNIE INC I23024310001 290 3, I90.00 S 2,792.70 1241 72ND AVE N 7220 Central Ave FRIDLEY MN 55432 AUGE, KEVIN I23024310041 99 1,089.00 S 95337 7190 CENTRAL AVE �TE 117 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR CENTRAL AVE IlNPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.1998 - 4 Estimated Assessment for Concrete C�ub & Actual Gutter Based on Assessment Address PIN No. Front Ft S 11 Per Front Ft $9.63 Per Front Ft BURG RONALD 8c MARY 123024310040 100.00 1,100.00 S g63.pp 224 HERITAGE LN 7170 Central Ave NEW BRIGH'CON MN 55l 12 BECK RUSSELL E 123024310039 100.00 I, I00.00 $ 963.00 1236 72ND AVE NE 'I150 Central Ave FRIDLEY MN 55432 ONAN CORP 123024410003 1,635.00 17,985.00 15,745.05 1400 73RD AVE NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 45.209.21 45,209.21 $ 6Q954.26 Agreement with City R � County for entrence . recomtruction PEEK GEORGE H& ZITA T 133024130037 170.00 2,040.00 $ 1,637.10 6633 CENTRAL AVE NE (270 total 100 FRIDLEY MN 55432 conc WEINAND DENhIS G& 133024210011 80.00 880.00 $ 7'7p,40 TERESA L 6700 CENTRAL AVE NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 WRZESINSKI WALTER 133024210006 160.00 1,760.00 $ 1,540.80 6850 SIVERTS LN NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 MEDTRONIC INC 123024340003 1,210.00 13,310.00 11,65230 7000 CENTRAL AVE NE 123024430001 843.00 9,273.00 8.118.09 FRIDLEY MN 55432 $ 19 77039 ANOKA COUNTY PARKS 133024120004 565.00 6,215.00 5,440.95 DEPT 133024120015 484.00 5,324.00 4,660.92 550 BUNKER LAKE BLVD NW 133024210058 220.00 2,420.00 2,118.60 ANOKA MN 55304 133024210002 300.00 3300.00 2.889.00 1569.00 $ 15109.47 KLOHS THEODORE W& 133024120020 66.00 726.00 $ 635.58 LINDA 6851 CENTRAL AVE NE Total Assessments 5129,856.91 118 __ . �� <. 9,�� ' .. lk�i A �i , � � � '*' 3c �.,' s � � � � �� " � i i� J � � •t, � , � rnri � �,: �� ' '�" � �� :- > �. .: +s � T,`�� °�F k 3 �� '� i� t' ,, s • ;S.F�• � � �i, � �.. � "� ,� � ,� � °� + 1�i., ' � , �s bi:°tl�� LY�a' M �g ti'^ �! , � ' � ` z ^ ' ," �, ' � �r... ....:��; :�•+�` o• �'.re +R s:�E: (` �r", -:str' � ' �"..;. -' .. s,�=�: �' � .. � `ri y .'a+ !, iiK�: i'.%f �� , i� ,. �, � _ � '� �z,.� � �O w^ii � �,'. s � . � �.�7 � �y "`�� . �t �. �� I i k�, �' `� � �� '� M, _ . .. �w��(/J . ;. p, x' f�• , p"y�'. ""_�-„ v� C+ ,Y w�; �. �. -` Q c'}N�,^.��<1aG,'r INE"t .: �v� . � � » ar '� 3� o e � Q � '�" a�'E.. � `' � � T3rf� .� � ly� _ �s � u "�r# � � � ° �► r�. � " ° N.E. °' �. ��; �, GF. a. Ai�� wat�s�� T�° 62 B�IKHOF,ft�i�tt�i . ; : '� �-� FRIQL ��-.Q��-. , E Y � s� H. a a� R U� c��. -� ��, �., .. �. s. �s�.a�r c�. � er � i � � �� t,+ � . � � . s' � 65 E t39Efi's.�t �GIlL � -� -�.�:i A:JP.'U4 a�.� i6. W.L`R`�CAEST '� '.�� N.c. ..,`::.r,�,:c�c � _ _ . 8a. �. 7i+�3e'A R,IGLe � : �.or",K'c'Qt 9'+. S. T IMB�R ?;t}� `�` �� , . � ',�s��J �. -p � , /Ay� � fi" tC'? :� ::�. _ hV ��:.. . . � � "Q _ "_: .- �, . . . ' �{� . . , . , : �. . . �. �_ _ - f : �—��+ RiCE CREEk � 6':tn AYc`. N:s. °-� `��> � ��, N , a�r+�CR.� y'�' , � ti �.,; 9B. � � ,� � � � � �� ,� : ,`. `^ OY�RTOqr y •~i� t'� �B th �YE. � ? 87. ESrh � h O� 5 T` � ..�i � A`dE. 6S � �'� KEkNA5 T� � � �.�1 Ck4,yy , `� '�Y � '} y2.'- '"�� w 69 th x ' '�,r� '� � r � � �Q'�' �• � � �./t 0 ;r '� � '2 ' " _ � "- g 'tn AtvE, � � � ��if . � •� bitn ��, 4 � � '�%z�^ -a �.- C, " � � 4t4 �i � ,� r� ' 6fitC .1vE. ti +n ve � _ � rtc eyc, . �a � . , tOYEFt� � �yE. � � , s � 'a � 65 th v� �1`i th: ."`s 1t'� � � � � °L, �6tr1 `� ' � '� Q�-' A4 �, ��c`b PAF?K a �: a � �':�., f ►�hlSSt55iPPt in +tvE. � � ' , �' � �`�' � -�• � °� � '�,� � `�'� �r ��, ° � � sr. � 4 -� � � Hsll BE�INEi� QR, � � N r � � � � � �``� g� �ANA �i r �` V". . � ,n p'` x 64 t*s d.- `' � i^ Z � � a A VE` � N Q v o4t!i AY�. �f ;" , Z � b ... . � � 2 ��' � t.. . . .. . . �. 5 : _Q � � �' O � .. !t u u _A, . .. � �' � Y � � K �6 ;:AME L+7T ;� � _ � � � � � a y'' ��K£ � wr''✓� RIt� �`, = s 'q 63r� �Ya � �.' � # ' y UR� ��' �''.:� sz's. .�i �C� SIOE'�T � �� ; 1 :4. OU:N: Y � T. rG �p � �".,¢ G �4 +'dRS ARB�4J,,�, '� �'• . � �c a' P`�. 4 � Ka't � � !�. Ca?f,'Ic` �t. ` `: � ., � '*' .. . ;.e �� . �''.' .. tY �R �v�'�. � ti ; 6, °.. '"1.y�� Nt'�, '� � E ` P�"' v� �6�5 - � � C . � �� "` , ' � R.t� CR�' 6#a- , AYE: � ,�°�r� � �? rY _�'iNfR1�K ; -. �'. tg !S"�- � „�"�„ ` � � _� � ��*��AA':� '� .., � -�.�„�� N.�. � S sq t'll:_Cp=�� :: � vs- a .- ai�ir� �+E. " � � •� , � a�:. �t. : �. L�• - �`[R�. ,,- �, a � �.- ^� � ,� c . };'� ,,d Cr `"; ,� e�:r` �'"" ��. � -: �. �e � ^ � j 4�.I , ; 3 , � � L•,' �:: L'i,t �.�.�r � a: � , � ' � ;� � MC4 t::t3L= 2 '* t6 , : e,� ' ;.�E. � s. R.s � ,�1: l=k. .N - �.< , . ti . ; ._ g , ..�. . . . .: : Y � ' . � ' � ' � 1+. � �. ' " ._ ,_ „�� F'Fi t�� f _} �f �--.., � ��.tl � !'� �� , . , . . A ' Y�: . :� . . , �e- - 119 � ` CfiY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 TO: WII.LIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER^r � �t� ��u SUBJECT: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2000-1 DATE: September 26, Z000 Attached you will fmd the final assessment roll for the Street Improvement Project No. St. 2000-1 along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. The total cost to the City for this project is $812,108.16. The Public Hearing Notice listed the total proposed assessment at $113,836.88. $8,490.72 has since been removed from the assessment roll for costs amibutable to a City park. The final assessment is $105,346.16. The 47 properties in this project will be assessed at $14 per front foot. The balance of the project costs of $706,762 will be paid from the Street Capital Improvement Fund and the General Fund. The assessment for the residential properties will be for 10 yeazs at a rate of 6.5%. The assessment for commercial properties will be for 15 years at 6.5%. RDP/sf 120 RESOLUTION NO. -2000 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2000-1 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the Street Improvement Project No. 2000-1. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment for a residential property shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten yeazs, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2001, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6%2 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. Such assessment for a commercial property shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of fifteen years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2001, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6%z percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 121 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET II1�IPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2000 -1 Esrimated Assessment for Concrete C�rb & Actual Gutter Based on Assessment 4 4 t HOEKSTRA LAURENCE R& 113024140004 79.97 1,119.58 $1,119.58 NANCY 841 73"° AVE FRIDLEY MN 55432 LAWRENCE, LEONARD & 113024140071 179.60 2,514.40 $2,514.40 JUDITH 895 73RD AVE NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 GRACE EVANGELICAL FREE 113024140100 300.00 4,200.00 $4,200.00 CH 755 73RD AVE NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 SHAW WILLIAM JR & MARSHA 113024240005 I80.00 2,520.00 $2,520.00 7400 LYRIC LN NE 4l5 74th Ave FRIDL MN 4 2 STEVENS BARBARA J 113024240006 180.00 2,520.Q0 $2,520.00 1949 COLLINS ST 389 74th Ave NE MORA MN 55051 BAYER RUDOLPH C 113024240007 90.00 1,260.00 $1,260.00 2921 BROOKSHIRE LANE 371 74th Ave NEW BRIGHTON MN 55112 MERNAUGH, PAUL & LISA 113024240008 90.00 1,260.00 $1,260.00 5811 195T" AVE NW 361 74th Ave ANOKA MN 55303 B&D MATTHEWS 113024240009 198.93 2,785.02 $2,785.02 INVESTMENT 351 '74th Ave 1410 S FERRY ST ANOKA MN 55303 122 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2000 -1 Estimated Assessment for Concrete Curb & Actual Gutter Based on Assessment r Front Ft 14 F t 14 r nt Ft JAWOR, TIMOTHY P Il3o2a2aot4l 110.00 9,950.52 $9,950.52 9175 107T" ST N (7at 1) Curb in place Agreement W install S&W Services STILLWATER MN 55082 11302424ot42 utilities (7413) II3024240143 (74I5) I13024240144 (741� 1t3024240145 (74t9) 113024240146 (7421) 'v i v QUAM ALLAN D& JUDITH A 113024240060 120.00 1,680.00 $1,680.00 399-73RD AVE NE 399 73rd Ave NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 KNUTSON WINIFRED A 113024240061 87.08 1,219.12 $1,219.12 7301 SYMPHONY ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 FINKE, ROBERT 113024240062 78.43 1,098.02 $1,098.02 • 7311 SYMPHONY ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 BENTILLA, CATHERINE 113024240063 77.40 1,083.60 $1,083.60 7321 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 JOHNSON MARCENE D 113024240064 82.56 1,155.84 $1,155.84 7331 SYMPHONY ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 MATHISEN DAVID & 113024240065 82.56 1,155.84 $1,155.84 MARGUERITE 7341 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 ELIASON BYRON M& NONA 113024240066 77.41 1,083.74 $1,083.74 M 7351 SYMPHONY ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 123 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET II1�IPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2000 -1 Estimated Assessment for Concreu C�rb & p�� Gutter Based on Assessment A t 4 r t t 4 nt t LEDIN DARRYL D& CARLENE 113024240067 82.56 1,155.84 $1,155.84 K 7361 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 MEHAN NICKOLAS T& 113024240068 80.50 1,12?.00 $1,127.00 KAREN A � 7371 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 KING BEVERLY R 113024240069 82.57 1,155.98 $ t,155.98 7381 SYMPHONY ST FRID 4 PETERSEN DWAYNE & 113024240070 82.57 1,155.98 $1,155.98 KATHLEEN 7391 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 HELM DALE A& POLLY A 113024240071 60.60 848.40 $848.40 7399 SYMPHONY ST FRID EY 4 2 ABLE PROPERTY MGMT INC 113024240074 75.00 1,050.00 $1,050.00 9920 ZILLA ST NW 360 74th Ave COON RAPIDS MN 55433 AGARWAL JUGAL K 113024240075 75.00 1,050.00 $1,050.00 3015 12TH ST NW 372 74th Ave NEW BRIGHTON MN SS l 12 PAPINEAU TAN J 113024240076 98.30 1,376.20 $1,376.20 811 KENDALL CT 380 74th Ave INDIANAPOLIS IN 46234 HELGERSON JAN & DLJNN 113024240078 83.64 1,170.96 $1,170.96 CASARDRA 7388 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 OKSNEVAD, HAAKON & JANE 113024240079 93.68 1,311.52 $1,311.52 7378 SYMPHONY ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 124 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2000 -1 Estimated Assessment for Concrete Gu� & Actual Gutter Based on Assessment dd r t t P t 14 er t Ft SCHREINERANTHONY& 113024240080 80.15 1,122.10 $1,122.10 CYNTHIA 7372 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 TANGREN ELWOOD R& 113024240081 81.86 1,146.04 $3,846.04 BARBARA +2,'7pp,00 7368 SYMPHONY ST Agreement to move FRIDLEY MN 55432 h drant KRUEGER JAMES R& RITA A 113024240082 78.73 1,102.22 $1,102.22 7362 SYMPHONY ST FRID 4 JOHANNSEN THORWALD W& 113024240083 100.16 1,402.24 $1,402.24 L 7358 SYMPHONY ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 MERRYMAN KENNETH & 113024240084 78.72 1,102.08 $1,102.08 MARION 7348 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 LAPOUR, ELIZABETH A 113024240085 78.72 1,102.08 $1,102.08 7336 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 MATTSON RONALD F& 113024240086 78.72 1,102.08 $1,102.08 MARY E 7324 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 CZARNECKI, EDWARD & 113024240087 78.72 1,102.08 $1,102.08 MARIAN 7312 SYMPHONY ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 SANDQUIST JAMES & 113024240088 83.96 1,175.44 $1,175.44 VIRGINIA 7300 SYMPHONY ST NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 125 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2000 -1 Estimated Assessment for Concrete C�ub & Actual Gutter Based on Assessment Address PIN No. Front Ft $14 Per Front Ft $14 r Front Ft OKES, DAVID 8c DIANNE 113024240138 36.00 504.00 $504.00 7396 SYMPHONY ST FRIDLEY MN 55432 OSTERKAMP JAMES D& 113024240139 37.73 528.22 $528.22 JANICE 7398 Symphony St PO BOX 48332 COON RAPIDS MN 55448 Estimated Assessment per Address PIN No. Northco Development Actual Assessment Agreement COMMERCIAL RAIL PROP. INC I 13024310011 7,642.28 $7,642.28 508 CLEVELAND AVE N 113024310012 ST PA MN 14 CSM PROPERTIES INC 1 I3024420008 6,05933 $6,05933 2575 UNIVERSITY AVE W ST PAUL MN 55113 DAYTON HUDSON CORP 113024410005 17,883.88 $17,883.88 777 NICOLET MALL MINNEAPOLIS MN 55402 WILLAMET'fE INDUSTRIES INC 113024310020 11,664.53 $11,664.53 350 NORTHCO DRIVE NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 Residenrial Assessments $ 70,586.86 Commercial Assessments 43.250.02 Total Assessments $105,346.16 G F�� CIi'Y OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 9, 2000 TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER� � �l► FROM: SUBJECT: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR ALAN FOLIE, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE RICE CREEK PHASE 2 BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT DATE: September 26, 2000 Attached you will find the final assessment roll for the Rice Creek Phase 2 Bank Stabilization Project along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. The total cost of this project is $88,178.38. The 15 properties in this project will be assessed at $10 per front foot for a total assessment of $17,800. The balance of the project costs of $70,378.38 will be paid from the Storm Water Fund and the General Fund ($35,433.03), and the Rice Creek Watershed District's matching grant program ($34,945.35). The assessment will be for 15 years at a rate of 6.�%. RDP/sf Attachment 1�� RESOLUTION NO. -2000 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR RICE CREEK PHASE 2 STABILIZATION PROJECT WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the Rice Creek Phase 2 Stabiliza.tion Project. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of fifteen years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2001, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6'/2 percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2001. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of fhe assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the next succeeding year. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR 129 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR RICE CREEK PAASE 2 BANK STABQ.IZATION PROJECT NO. 333 Esrimated Actual Assessment Assessment Address PIN No. Front Ft $20.00 per Front $10.00 per Front Ft Ft REED ROGER G 143024220043 I10 $2,200.00 $1,100.00 290 RICE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 SMYRE MELFORD E& DEBORAH Y 143024220044 215 $4,300.00 $2,150.00 286 RICE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 PATCHIN ALAN E& JEAN C 143024220045 55 $1,100..0 $550.00 280 RICE CREEK BLVD NE p FRIDLEY MN 55432 D[EGO BENITO B 143024220046 85 $1,700.00 $850.00 276 R[CE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 LARSON ALBERT H& BETfY LOU 143024220047 95 $1,900.00 $950.00 270 RICE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 FARBER JANET M& KENNETH L 143024220048 80 $1,600.00 $800.00 266 RICE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 ONEILL DANIEL S& JANICE L 143024220049 75 $1,500.00 $750.00 260 RICE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN SS432 ARTMANN MARVIN J& DOROTHY 143024220050 145 $2,900.00 $1,450.00 254 RICE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 SADOWSKI GERALD & DELORES 143024220051 160 $3,200.00 $1,600.00 250 RICE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 MADSEN EVERETT E& JANET M 143024220053 95 $1,900.00 $950.00 246 RICE CREEK BLVD NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 130 ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR RICE CREEK PAASE 2 BANK STABILIZATION PROJEC:C NO. 333 Estimated Actual Assessment Assessment Address PIN No. Front Ft $20.00 per Front $ I 0.00 per Front Ft Ft ZUK CARL & JOAN M 143024220066 I 15 $2,300.00 $I,150.00 281 RICE CREEK "I'ER NE • FRIDLEY MN 55432 C�.RSTENS WILMER & ANDERSON 143024220067 180 $3,600.00 $1,800.00 MJ 271 RICE CREEK TER NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 ELVERUD LYLE M& ELSIE M 143024220071 85 $1,700.00 $850.00 221 RICE CREEK TER NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 ROITH MICHAEL J& JOANNE M 143024220079 115 $2,300.00 $L,I50.00 23I RICE CREEK TER NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 MICKLEY TERRANCE & THERESA 143024220081 85 $1,700.00 $850.00 241 RICE CREEK TER NE FRIDLEY MN 55432 VOIGT DARWIN A 153024140053 85 $1,700.00 $850.00 24243 COLJNTY RD 7 6750 Main St ST CLOUD MN 56301 131 �� w. ' �"� �. f: � f �� . � � , �` �' �/ / � , .�� ' � "�,/ � � � i/ � � / � � F�� : :'-----1 j � � , , ._� j `� y - , /� � � ,� �f � L i� i; F �" �`� � ' ;� � � �" `` �` �� ; ,- ; .. ,.: , , � � _ �� ,, ,� 1 � � � � y �� : � �� ` � �. �' �� / /'� �� 2� � �� / � j�. � M �� / \ �� ' �� .3� � � / \ � W �t K � � �� . , J C � /l � � � � !( �Fl } '3 �✓ .� � ;i 2� ; � ' '� � � . : � � / �� ; � `�: . � � ��' --- �� 2� , 26,�; - � � 28 � � ; � f� f ,-' `` � � _ '`. ! . . � � I �� ` � � �, .�' �6 6 � "� y- ._ ! , .�! 2�1 �,; " - ; ---_ - � "_ � '�`�;�' ; � � 2�1, �� , o - ,=` o ; � � I `�_ - � �% � 2�''I �'� ��--- � � � � �` f �i i '` I , ,�, ; . _ �i 1 :� � � �:x ; � �� .- ; y _ � , ,� \ � �- � ,. ��{, � ; ___ _ . . _ . � . : �- < , 'l �\ � _ � \ / `\ �' : �\". � � � �� {` � 1 = ; y'' '" \� � _ _ � � ��_ , ��,�� ;�' _,---� ! +% - -- ;` � `�� / ��, � � ;; ; � ; � i � -- -- ��=' � r - '�l f �� . . ...�/ �t 1 ��____ �" \ :.�;' � AGENDA ITEIIVI f CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF IDCTOBER 9, 2000 QTY OF FRIDLEY INFORMAL STATUS REF"ORTS 133