The URL can be used to link to this page

02/05/2001 - 4737� . � n��ir � FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING ATTENDENCE SHEET Manday, Febnuarcy 5, 2001 ' 7:30 P.M. PLEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PRINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS ITEM NUMBER i �___ � , l� % � '� `� � L�--� �C� , �J `` � Gi � ; =�� - �: , . " , , % ,, ; 1 :� — / � -� ` �,�,_.:��= � ��' %1� ;��,,L'�_C,�4(._�...;�; r.'}' ,(,: IT�� / I_l , � � _ . %� 'i� � > � � � � � l� J "i L �i � �l � �" �G?�,:. +f �� t �~� I� ��v ��, �- _ �, ;�� 1<�- , �7 _. � z- l,�— r, -�,� +�'.='s'�� L� . � � y ��- �, �"5� � .��'x,� ��_� 'v : f I r �� f, rv� �-�� ; � i—�: ' � � / r� ��} ��. �yti�.�. yu. . r �� (, �. _--a--- __1-- l / �� / �- ��i �; ��li � :f�'3'�'].�' � / � 7 � � L'" � c/� � _ -� � ' Y� . _ � � � � : - � ,- , , , ;,��-., i �'i ;�;,_�'I�j1r;J r1�1" '''r _v � > � �,1- - l �;.�- ./- c •.�T`I�`` t� �%<�,- iv�K � S �. /7 i : ; -. .� �` f /, l ..� 4,,( ',� . � `—� .�' ._:�— `�� l�� a �., ,� � / A./ � �— . ' �. . I ,—, ,_ . Y _ i �,,� �.' , r 'r✓ �� ; j �Y 2, , ,� , � � �; ,�_�. ��n�= �a ��, , ,�. , �, � , , � .� � ._ . ��y ,� ��- ,,, � �,:.� � � ��-�-._- � � -- , , , �- � - � �� , ,�,��, - � � � y. � . � � __ . � ' Lf�l i.�,rt . �� ° %I�:��- c= L;�! /` _/-> '`�� .s � - - , � � - .- -. . _ � � , „ � ` ' ° � ' �' � �i ,��-t°_'� �" 'i?i� � ��- r_ ( � �, / % .,.� _f ...,[ t _ ` , � ,--� .-�" _ �/ � ` i • .� G ' ` ��, ' �� C � �� (�< �!� lC�/�;' i� �_ � Q `) ' U✓L'L�C � � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 GTY 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 regazd 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 au�ciliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PROCLAMATION: Steve Novak Appreciation Day: February 5, 2001 LEGISLATIVE UPDATE. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Councii Meeting of January 22, 2001 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS: 1. Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 17, 2001 ............................................... 1- 6 . 2. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #00-03, by David Lopez, to Create Two Residential Lots, Generally Located at 35 — 62"d Way (Ward 3) ......................................... 7- 12 3. Approve Agreement between the City of Fridley and Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company for the Replacement of the Timber Railway Crossing at 77th Avenue N.E. (Ward 3) ................................................................................................... 13 - 17 4. Motion to Support Application for 2001-2002 -- Community Development Block Grant Funds for the Fridley Youth Recreation Scholarship Program................................................................................................... 18 - 28 5. Motion to Support Application for 2001-2002 Community Development Block Grant Funds for the Fridley Senior Companion Program ............................................. 29 - 39 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: y NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED)• 6. Approve Contract Between the City of Fridley and � Government and Enterprise Services for Funding � for Highway 65 Improvements Befinreen I-694 and63�d Avenue N.E. ............................................................................. 40 45 . 7. Appointment .......................... ........................................... 46 ....................... 8. Claims ............................................ .......................................................... 47 9. Licenses .................................................................................................. 48 - 49 10. Estimates - - - ................................................................................................. 50 ADOPTION OF AGENDA. �' OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: Consideration of items not on Agenda — 15 minutes. r FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5 2001 PAGE 4 PUBLIC HEARING: 11. Ordinance Recodifying the Fridley City Code, � Chapter 205, Entitled "Zoning," by Adding a New Section 205.XX, 0-5 Residential Lots , Created Prior to 1955 District Regulations - (Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-04 by the City of Fridley) ............................ 51 - 62 .................................................. . NEW BUSINESS: 12. First Reading of an Ordinance Recodifiying the Fridley City Code, Chapter 205, Entitled "Zoning," by Adding a New Section 205.XX, 0-5 Residential Lots Created Prior to 1955 District Regulations (Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-04 by the City of Fridley) ..................................................... 63 - 69 13. Establish a Public Hearing for March 5, 2001, on an Ordinance Amending Chapter 7 of the Fridley City Charter Pertaining to Taxation and Finances ..................................... 70 - 79 14. Informal Status Report ....................................................................... 80 ADJOURN. A �olacl�tr�I,�S�,� r�. U FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 .. � QiY OF FRDLE1f 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: Steve Novak Appreciation Day: February 5, 2001 .(�ok �c�e.S��n� LEGISLATIVE UPDATE. �n� (j��.�lp9, �� 6U0�-�iY� �� V ��4 �� APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINU?ES: City Council Meeting of January 22, 2001 NEW BUSINESS: Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 17, 2001 ............................................. 1 - 6 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 3. Approve Agreement befinreen the City of Fridley and Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company for the Replacement of the Timber Railway Crossing at 77'h Avenue N.E. (Ward 3) 13 - 17 ...................................... 4. Motion to Support Application for 2001-2002 Community Development Block Grant Funds for the Fridley Youth Recreation Scholarship Program...................................... 18 - 28 �� Q� �� — 5. 2. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #00-03, by David Lopez, to Create Two Residential Lots, Generally Located at 35 – 62"d Way (Ward 3) ....................................... 7 - 12 Motion to Support Application for 2001-2002 Community Development Block Grant Funds for the Fridley Senior Companion Program..:......:.......................:.... 29 - 3A 6. Approve Contract Between the City af Fridley and Government and Enterprise Services for Funding for Highwa� 65 Improvements Between I-694 and 63 Avenue N.E . ............................................ 40 - 45 7. A�pointment ................................ 46 < . � �, FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 8. Claims .......................................... 47 9. Licenses ...................................... 48 - 49 10. Estimates ..... ADOPTION OF AGENDA. 50 12. First Reading of an Ordinance Recodifying the Fridley City Code, Chapter 205, Entitled "Zoning," by Adding a New Section 205.XX, 0-5 Residential Lots Created Prior to 1955 District Regulations (Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-04 b the City of Fridley) .... 63 - 69 �� „� �-?�, �,�1� � 13. Establish a Public Hearing for March 5, 2001, on an Ordinance Amending Chapter 7 of the Fridley City Charter Pertaining to Taxation and Finances ................................. 70 - 79 �� P�U� 14. Informal Status Report ... OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: Consideration of items not on Agenda - 15 minutes. ��Q.i/�,v�� S.� o1n;v�s�,n - Ca,,•�••�'�`i-c r ra`., � s•1-e�i-ia �n ADJOURN. PUBLIC HEARING: 11. Ordinance Recodifying the Fridley City Code, Chapter 205, Entitled "Zoning," by Adding a New Section 205.XX, 0-5 Residential Lots Created Prior to 1955 District Regulations (Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-04 by the City of Fridley) .............................. 51 - 62 �� ,�n ��C��+�,� � � � �� (�.��_� �i ,/`tC� �fil.� �� :� , r srEVE.NOV�x AI'I'RECIAT'IONDAY February S, 2001 �� WHEREAS, Steve Novak has provided distinguished legislative service for twenty-six years; and N'HE'REAS, Steve Novak represented the southern Anoka County area in the Minnesota Senate during the past eight years; and K'HEREAS, Steve Novak was the legislator most responsible for supporting the Ciry of Fridley s request for assistance with the Medtronic World Headquarters project; WHEREAS, Steve Novak has made many contributions to the physical, social and economic development in the City of Fridley; and WHEREAS, Steve Novak's dedication and hard work has enhanced the quality of life in the City of Fridley; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL I�ED, that I, Scott J. Lund, Mayor of the Ciry of Fridley, do hereby proclaim Monday, February S, 2001, to be: STEVE NOVAK APPREC/A TION DA Y in the City of Fridley. -- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Fridley to be a�xed this Sth day of February, 2001. SCOTT J. LUND, MAYOR THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF JANUARY 22, Z001 r The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order by Mayor Lund at - 7:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Lund led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund, Councilmember Barnette, Councilmember Billings, Councilmember Wolfe, and Councilmember Bolkcom MEMBERS ABSENT: None PROCLAMATIONS: Fridlev Javicee Week: January 21 - 27 2001 Mayor Lund stated that the Fridley Jaycees has adopted the basic tenets of purpose of brotherhood, free enterprise, government of laws, human personality, and service to humanity. Mr. Carter Hendricks stated that the Jaycees is a young person's organization for ages 21 through 39. Community service and individual development is emphasized. He said if anyone would like to join please ca11763-786-7230 or the Blaine Jaycees. Councilmember Wolfe stated that he used to be in the Jaycees and knows they do an incredible amount for the schools and neighbors. Mr. Carter Hendricks stated that he would like to keep in coritact with members of the commissions and schools to work in cooperation to identify and meet the needs. His telephone number is 763-502-0828. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the proposed consent agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. . FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22 2001 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of January 8, 2000 0 APPROVED. NEW BUSINESS: 1. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 3, 2001: RECEIVED THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 3, 200L 2. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2001 MISCELLANEOUS CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER AND SIDEWALK PROJECT NO. 338: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that each year the City awards a contract for replacement of concrete curbing and gutter that is torn up as a result of work on City water and sewer lines, as well to snow plowing. This year staff recommended that last year's contract with Ron Kassa Construction be extended for one additional year. The cost of this contract with a two percent (2%) increase would be $54,908.50. Staff recommended Council's approval. AWARDED CONTRACT TO RON KASSA CONSTRUCTION. 3. RESOLUTION NO. 9-2001 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT APPROVAL OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS• STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2001 - 10 (SEALCOAT� Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the resolution authorizes the advertisement for bids for the 2001 sealcoat program. The streets that are projected to be sealcoated generally lie south of 73`d Avenue, north of I-694, east of Highway 65 and west of the New Brighton border. Council has budgeted $180,000 for this work in the 2001 capital improvements budget. Staff recommended Council's approval. APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 9-2001. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 10-2001 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT APPROVAL OF PLANS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: SANITARY AND STORM SEWER LINING PROJECT NO. 337: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the sanitary sewer project for 2001 consists of relining and repairing 635 feet of 24 inch, of reinforced concrete pipe that runs under the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad tracks and yard at 44�' Avenue and Main Street. Staff proposed to reline the�10-inch sanitary sewer line that runs between 57`� Place to University Avenue along 57 Avenue. The storm sewer project would reline 750 feet of FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22 2001 PAGE 3 reinforced concrete line that lies east of Highway 65 and south of Fireside Drive. Staff budgeted $170,000 for storm and sanitary sewer repair. Staff recommended Council's approval. APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 10-2001. 5• RESOLUTION NO. 11-2001 IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT FOR FRIDLEY TOTINO GRACE HIGH SCHOOL (SHARX NIGHT CLUB) Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this is a renewal of an application that expires March 31, 2001. The new permit would take effect on April 1, 2001 and run through March 31, 2003. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 11-2001. 6• RESOLUTION NO. 12-2001 IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT FOR FRIDLEY TOTINO GRACE HIGH SCHOOL (SPIKERS GRILLE & BEACH CLUB) Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this is another renewal with the same time parameters as the item above. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 12-2001. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 13-2001 ESTABLISHIN�G A TRI-CITY TASK FORCE TO STUDY THE WATER OUALITY OF SPRING LAKE Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the residents who live near Spring Lake have asked that something be done about low water levels in Spring Lake. The resolution would establish a three-city task force to identify options for improving water levels in Spring Lake. While there is no funding commitment involved here, Fridley could be asked to fund some pro rata share of costs associated with this improvement project. Staff recommended Council's approval. _ ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 13-2001. 8. APPOINTMENT - CITY EMPLOYEE: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that staff recommended the appointment of Jennifer Dunn to the position of Management Assistant in the City Manager's Office. She has a Bachelor's Degree in Political Science from Hamline University and a Master's Degree in Public Management from the Humphrey Institute at the University of Minnesota. Jennifer is currently employed by the City of St. Paul as a policy analyst for their Council Research Office. She has also worked for the Hennepin County Human Resources 11 Department and the Minnesota Board of Government Innovation and Cooperation. Staff recommended Council's approval. . APPOINTED JENNIFER DUNN TO THE POSITION OF MANAGEMENT + ASSISTANT. 9. CLAIMS: APPROVED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 97563 THROUGH 97816. 10. LICENSES: APPROVED ALL LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE WITH THE LICENSE CLERK. 11. ESTIMATES: Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. Holstad and Knaak, P.L.C. 1690 Minnesota World Trade Center 30 East Seventh Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Services Rendered as City Attorney for the $ 5,000.00 Month of December, 2000 Carl J. Newquist, Esq. Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered 301 Fridley Plaza Office Building 6401 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432-4381 Services Rendered as City Prosecuting Attorney $18,360.00 for the Month of October, 2000 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE � MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM,VISITORS: No visitors in the audience spoke. 1 p NEW BUSINESS: � 12• FIRST READING O 0 �..,U lu- �j�j��, �wtv�;KS TO PAY RELC DISPLACED RESIDENTS UPON PARK CLOSINGS: Mr. Fernelius, HRA Housing Coordinator, stated that this would amend Fridley City Code and create a new chapter entitled "Manufactured Home Park Closings." This ordinance addresses the closure and/or conversion of manufactured home parks and requires that the park owner provide financial assistance to residents who would be displaced by that closure. Adoption of this ordinance is authorized under Minnesota Statutes. Staff referenced a codified version of the ordinance. The City Council received a petition of approximately 400 residents last year. Staff met with a small group of residents as well as APAC, a non-profit agency in June of last year. Staff inet with the manufactured home park owners in August of last year and then began working on a draft of the ordinance in October. Staff used a number of different models from other communities in research efforts. Last November 20, Council held a public hearing for the draft ordinance. Council directed staff to rework the proposal and come back in January with a revised ordinance. Staff tried to incorporate all the comments received. This ordinance required that prior to closure or conversion of mobile home parks, the park owner had to provide a nine- month notice to all residents as well as the City. That is something prescribed by State law. The notice must indicate the availability, location, and potential cost of replacement housing within a 25-mile radius of the park. The City must hold a public hearing, and the ordinance identifies a sixty-day deadline. Proper notice of the public hearing also has to be provided for the public, including the residents affected by the closure. Mr. Fernelius stated that the park owner's obligations are to provide relocation costs within a 25- mile radius that will include the cost of moving the home, decks, and sheds. In addition, transportation will be covered to another site, hook-up at the new location, as well as insurance for the property. The park purchaser is obligated to provide compensation to the displaced residents if the owner chooses not to relocate within that 25-mile radius. The amount the displaced resident would receive equals the estimated market value of the unit or the assessed value for tax purposes. The displaced resident is obligated to submit a contract or verified cost estimate for the relocation expenses within ninety days of receiving the closure statement. Alternatively, they may provide a written statement indicating they cannot or choose not to move and wish to be compensated. The ordinance outlines this process. The park closure ordinance also has a new provision that if displaced residents receive compensation under the Federal Uniform Relocation Act that they will not receive compensation under the ordinance. Staff recommends that Council approve the first reading of the manufactured home park closure ordinance and establish a date for the second meeting February 5, 2001. Councilmember Billings stated that in Section 223.07, No. 4, the last line states "displaced t owner." Councilmember Billings thought it should state: "displaced resident". He said that Council went through the previous draft, did a bunch of strike-outs, and he thought "resident" is what should be there. Number 2 in that same section, states that: "A person will either be paid the actual relocation costs, or an average of the actual relocation costs or an average of the estimated relocation costs. T'his does not specify who chooses. Mr. Fernelius stated that the ordinance is silent on that issue. Staff would need to evaluate possible new language. The intent of ei tcat onscosts to use an terms of lculat ng the a e agee actually moves, and staff has no actual Councilmember Billings stated that he could foresee that there could be serious discussions between a resident and a park owner about which fees should be paid. The City could be in the midst of a potential lawsuit. Mr. Fernelius stated that is a possibility. Councilmember Billings said State Statute 327C, however, is the basis for the City's authority to enter into this type of legislation. There are certain exclusions made in the State Statute for mortgage holders. He asked if the same type of exclusion is here in the City's proposed ordinance. Mr. Fernelius stated that was not addressed. Councilmember Billings asked Mr. ��akul olyd nancepwould concaeivable that a p k owner ho l der s f r o m t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h i s p would be unable to get a mortgage for their property. Mr. Knaak stated that it is conceivable if the language is construed a certain way. Councilmember Billings asked if it would be reasonable tonas�rt aee ho derseneed toaensure that put the exclusions in here. Attorneys who are representing g g should the mortgagee default on a mortgage, that the mortgage holder is able to step in and actually take control of the property. Mr. Knaak stated that is correct. Councilmember Billings stated that a qualified attorney for a mortgage company would raise some red flags to his or her client with respect to the proposed Fridley ordinance. Mr. Knaak stated that may be the case. Councilmember Barnette asked Councilmember Billings to give him a scenario. Councilmember Billings stated that the park owner would go to Wells Fargo Bank because they want to buy out the existing park and operate it as a park. Another scenario is that the current park owner needs to refinance it and goes to the bank and borrows money. Wells Fargo Bank will be exempted from certain requirements of the ordinance because the legislature realizes that if the park owner fails to make payments, the bank needs to step in and take the park. The bank needs to have the ability to come in and take the park and they become the owner of the park. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22. 2001 PAGE 7 Mr. Knaak stated that this is not necessarily a conflict in that this ordinance addresses the question of closure, and that the actual transfer of the ownership of the property does not trigger the operation of the ordinance. That may raise the question of whether or not there was some missed statement of applicability that would be remedied by some simple language stating that transfer of ownership does not necessarily mean closure. The mortgage issue would not come up unless the mortgage owner decided that the only way to get the money on the mortgage is to sell it and convert it for another use. In that instance, the ordinance would apply. Mayor Lund asked if who decides on the average cost would be determined by the estimates that they have for the other residents. He asked if an average would be based on estimations of two or three estimates. Mr. Fernelius stated that it is the average of the estimates that other displaced residents would have submitted to the owner of actual expenses or estimates from moving companies. Mayor Lund stated that if this issue of the estimates from different moving companies is not addressed in the ordinance, it leaves the door open for a highly inflated price. Councilmember Billings stated that the actual language states that the people will get paid on either an average of the actual relocation costs paid to the other displaced residents. He asked which estimate should be used. There should be an indication if it is the lower of the two estimates or an indication of who makes that determination. He asked if the ordinance was substantially the same as the State Statute. Mr. Fernelius stated that was correct. Councilmember Billings asked if the largest different between the Fridley ordinance and the State Statute is that the proposed Fridley ordinance would spell out a manner of compensation to park residents who would be able to pick up their trailer and move it to another park within 25 miles. Alternatively, the park resident who decided they did not want to move to a park within 25 miles, whether they could or not, this ordinance would require the purchaser of the park to buy their trailers. - - Mr. Fernelius stated that was correct. Councilmember Billings stated that this puts the City in the position of proposing an ordinance that would guarantee to someone that their home could be sold. Mayor Lund stated that this is not unique. Other communities have already adopted a similar type of ordinance for manufactured home parks. He asked if Fridley has researched with other municipalities park closure ordinances. He also asked if staff heard from the Minnesota Manufactured Housing Association. Mr. Fernelius stated that they have researched those communities that have adopted ordinances. There are nine right now and staff modeled the Fridley ordinance after the cities of Apple Valley and Roseville. Staff talked with several other communities also. The MMHA has not been FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 8 contacted because staff has been working with representatives from the park and the owners and their legal representatives. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mayor Lund why he asked if we were talking to the MMHA. Mayor Lund stated that MMHA deals with the park issues of many mobile home parks that are members of the Association. Right now in the legislature there are proposed changes pertaining to park closures. He met with Mark Bruruier, the director of the Association, and he is the one who told him about the changes coming up. They also deal with the installer's end of it and with retailers. Ms. Geri Lynne, 7303 Taylor Street, stated that she is the one who went around with a petition in March to ask the City Council to consider a park closure ordinance. The Park Alliance for Change representative that she talked with is unaware of any changes at the State level. Today she met with the director of APAC, and he never mentioned anything about it either. Mayor Lund stated that the legislature mandate would not stop Fridley from passing the ordinance. Ms. Lynne stated that under Subdivision 4 of the state statute on park closing, states that "The governing body may require a payment by the park owner to be made to the displaced resident for a reasonable relocation cost." The question we now have is: are there any places available for a displaced resident in a park within a 25 mile radius. In Fridley, the majority of the homes are older than ten years of age. Her concerns with the proposed ordinance is that the personal property moving expenses have not been included for reimbursement like other city's ordinances, appraisal fees are not included as a covered expense, and under "Displaced Resident Obligations" Section 223.06, there are unreasonable timing requirements which limits freedom of choice. Submitting a contract to verify cost estimates of relocation costs within ninety days of receiving the park closing notice is unreasonable because it may not be possible to find a park to move into during that time. Ms. Lynne said this section also permits the park owner to have the final say in who moves the homes which limits the residents' ability to choose. Ms. Lynne said Mayor Lund is in the mobile home moving business. If he was not liked by the park owner, he would not be able to get the business. The public hearing requirement requires the hearing to be held within sixty days after receiving the closing statement. This puts the homeowners under the gun. This shoud be eliminated. Tendering their titles is a concern also. The money from the residents' homes is going to go from the purchaser of the park into an escrow account. During that time, the residents are supposed to tender the titles of our homes over to the park owner, rather than the person who is actually going to be paying the bills. They do not have to pay us until sixty days before the closing of the park. If you were fortunate to find affordable housing and are ready to go, waiting the sixty days would be a nightmare. Other than these problems she has with the park closing ordinance, she thinks staff did a fine job and appreciates all their hard work. She likes the applicability paragraph. Another question is if this would be considered a discretionary fee under the new Charter Amendment. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 9 Mayor Lund stated that the Charter Amendment is being looked at by the Charter Commission, and it is still in their hands. Mr. Knaak stated that he could not deliver an opinion on this because of the possible . c�nsequences, but there is an issue there still being looked at. It hopefully will be resolved within a reasonable period of time. Mayor Lund stated that fortunately there has not been any news of any park closing in Fridley and there is time to make sure it is done. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Ms. Lynne's question was whether or not it was legal to vote on the first reading because we do not have a legal opinion. Mayor Lund stated that Council may come to that conclusion that evening. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the personal property questions would be in the ordinance. Mr. Fernelius stated that the Apple Valley and Roseville ordinances did not address this issue. There was a provision that dealt with displaced tenants. Mayor Lund stated that he felt Ms. Lynne was referring to sheds for personal property. Ms. Lynne stated that she meant personal belongings. Mayor Lund stated that if someone chooses not to sell the mobile home, then they need money to move the beYongings from the house. In most cases the moving company will not want to move the mobile home with all the personal effects inside. The mobile home is insured, not the contents. The additional weight is a detriment to moving mobile homes. Ms. Lynne stated that the Roseville ordinance includes personal property in the ordinance. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the appraisal fees. Mr. Fernelius stated that was an issue discussed. The language was subsequently deleted. Displaced residents could provide their own appraisal under this ordinance. The park owner would be obligated to pay that amount, assuming it is higher, but they would not be reimbursed for that appraisal fee. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what the City Manager has to do with the appraisal fee. ` Mr. Fernelius stated that in the previous version of the ordinance, he was the administrative officer that would be involved in looking at the appraisal submitted by the tenant or displaced . resident. It put the City in the position of deciding who would do the appraisal so he deleted that language. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 10 Mr. Knaak stated that the State Statute provides that the City can determine whether compensation can be made. This ordinance was drafted in a manner that the City would not find itself in that position. Therefore in a position of potential liability as a result. Once you have the ' City in the position of making the judgment calls, the City takes on liability. This ordinance was drafted to see that the City itself was not an actual player in the process and exposed to liability , on either side. The City is not overseeing, it is authorized under the statute to provide a standard and provide a means, but not taking the additional step of bringing the City in as an intermediary. Councilmember Barnette stated that Ms. Lynne mentioned the limitation of freedom of choice and the sixty day problem of waiting for their money. These all are issues to be discussed. Ms. Traci Tomas, representing the owners of Park Plaza Estates, stated that staff has done an excellent job of incorporating what they want to see in the ordinance. She was notified by APAC regarding this City's park closing ordinance and the work that the MMHA was doing on it. She put Ms. Lynne into contact with the MMHA which they aze working on. APAC has not been involved in any meetings as of yet. They are going to be taking this on a state level eventually. One of her main concerns was that she felt she was missing is that relocation costs would be limited to a certain percentage of the purchase price. The reason for this not being included in other park closing ordinances is that the incentive still remained there for the park owners to continue to improve the property when they have the vacant home sites to move in the new homes. Co�ancilmember Billings asked who w�ould decide whether it would be the average of the relocation costs paid to the resident or an average of the estimated relocation costs submitted by the displaced resident. The language says that the park owner would disclose all the purchasing infortnation and all of the consideration received by the park owner, including cash buyers had given to sellers, liens, mortgages, and other encumbrances paid by buyer on sellers behalf. After the relocation costs, it would disclose submittals for moving expenses to the City. Some timing issues were also a concern, like the ninety day time requirement. One issue she completely disagreed with was the personal property moving expenses. That language was put in there for renters with the other city ordinances. Councilmember Billings stated that under 223.08 it states that: "Compensation shall be in an amount equal to the estimated market value or the taxed assessed value of the manufactured home." It does not state who decides which of these two amounts. Council spoke of the scenario where the home owner has an appraisal done and pays for the cost of the appraisal. Mayor Lund made a reference to paying the higher amount. It does not say anything in the ordinance as to which of those amounts gets paid. Councilmember Billings asked if Hilltop has a park closure ordinance. Mr. Fernelius stated that the City of Hilltop does not have an ordinance. Councilmember Billings stated that the City of Hilltop is made up predominantly of manufactured housing. Mr. Fernelius stated that was correct. Councilmember Billings stated that the Mayor and City Council all live in manufactured housing. That is unique that they have not taken a position on this type of ordinance. He said he finds it interesting that only nine municipalities in the State of Minnesota out of 1,500 have a manufactured home park closing ordinance. The State statute adequately covers almost all the things in the proposed city ordinance. The only thing that is not covered in the State Statute is essentially compensation for those people who are unable to move their trailer or choose not to move the trailer. The Fridley ordinance requires the buyer of the park to compensate the person who chooses not to move their home. He has yet to see anyone come along to him and guarantee the sale of his home at any kind of a price. Councilmember Billings stated that this proposed ordinance is based on a premise that the mobile home park owner will sell the property at some kind of tremendous windfall price. Fridley could find ourselves in a situation in twenty years where the homes are going to be thirty years old and the homeowners are not able to keep them up any longer. They are not able to sell them, and there will be vacant homes and the park owner and foreclose on them. The park owner will be going broke because he is paying management and paying money to maintain a fallout shelter and this is costing more money to operate the park than he is taking in. He is able to find a buyer who will give him seventy cents on the dollar so he can bail out of it. Councilmember Billings said that Fridley is going to have an ordinance that says in addition to going broke already now you have to pay a bunch of mobile home owners compensation because you are going broke and now have to sell a park. The State Statute says that the City will hold a public hearing. It also says that Fridley may have to have other costs reimbursed by other people. It says: "The governing bodies of the municipality (that's us) may also require that other parties including the municipality, involved in the park closing provide additional compensation to residents to mitigate the adverse financial impact of the park closing upon the residents." That is the language that allows us to create this potential ordinance. Councilmember Billings said that he maintains that rather than creating an ordinance in the year 2001 for something that may happen in the future, the City should wait until this does happen. At that time at the public hearing, if this City Council determines that it is appropriate to assess charges to the purchaser or seller of the property or anyone else to compensate people for the relocation of homes, or to compensate people for not being able to relocate homes, the City has that authority for the year 2020 just as easily as we have that authority in the year 2001. He asked why Council would pass an ordinance now when they do not know the circumstances around that park closing. It is not appropriate to do this now. The rental agreement that a mobile home resident signs with the park owner is a contract. There is nothing that precludes the residents of a park from negotiating into their lease agreement with the landlord's provisions for what happens if the park closes. He would be more comfortable with an ordinance that spells out that they must address that with all leases signed in the City of Fridley after a certain date. The mobile home park owner and the resident can negotiate what they want to do in case there is a closing. Mayor Lund stated that Councilmember Billings made a good argument for the park, but it seems that the park management is in favor of this. Councilmember Billings stated that they are agreeing because they do not want any hassles with their tenants. This is not an area where the City of Fridley needs to be. If the State wants to do this they can come up with funding from the MHFA and rehab manufactured housing to prevent these kinds of things happening. Mayor Lund stated that because APAC has gotten involved with this, there will be a mandate to encompass a state-wide ordinance. It is proactive to do something now when we have the time rather than being influenced heavily when it becomes a volatile issue when it does happen. What he sees in this industry through his business is that parks love to take the older mobile homes out. The parks keep updating then and the community look better. Some mobile homes may not be relocatable. The new park owners have paid the people and received the title and it becomes the liability or asset to the developer or new buyer. The point is well taken whether the City should be involved in what is a contractual obligation. There is a state approved renters lease that does not address the issue and it limits the homeowners. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if any people that have owned these homes been compensated so is it a mute point for us to have our own ordinance. There must be a reason to have a State statute in the first place. N1r. Fernelius stated that a lot of this began in the late 1980's as a result of a case in Bloomington where a park had closed for a redevelopment project. Mayor Lund stated that it was the Wal-Mart development, and the City scrambled to have a public hearing. The developer paid his company and others. Each of those residents were paid around $250 for compensation for som ed fo� commercial development and those tenants were Mankato some of the park was being mo given a months free rent and a small flat fee. Councilmember Barnette stated that he is hearing Councilmember Billings say that the business of government is governing and the business of business is business. We, as government, should stay out of business. Perhaps we should not even have an ordinance. Councilmember Billings stated that if tWell be known as� to exa ly what is happen ng. ing before City Council of Fridley. Then the facts Mr. Knaak stated that the Arcadia development in Bloomington was the instance where the statute was implemented by ordinance for the first time. It was challenged by the owners. Waiting until the last minute risks an accusation that you are acting in an arbitrarily capricious way without any established criteria. By passing an ordinance with general standards you can avoid that. This is a means by which cities try to establish general criteria. You can have full discretion at that time to make decisions, but the purpose is to put the City in a position to do something. If you were to try to impose compensation on owners without this criteria in place, you could almost bet there would be litigation. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 13 Mayor Lund stated that he does not see any complaints about this ordinance from park owners as long as it is in a fair and equitable manner. The state also wants us to make manufactured ' housing stay in place and not get rid of it. , MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the First Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Fridley City code to Add chapter 223. Mayor Lund stated that the motion was not seconded. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table until an indefinite time. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what the purpose of tabling this was. Councilmember Barnette stated that he recorded seven different things that she brought up that were unresolved at this time. Those things are worthwhile looking into and bringing this back. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Councilmember Billings what he meant by "indefinite." Mayor Lund stated that this whole thing dies indefinitely and is brought up as a new issue. If you want to table it with a different motion after resolving the motion on the table, we could further review this at the next meeting for first reading. Mr. Burns stated that is his interpretation of tabling also. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that was why she asked the question. There is a difference between tabling because of the outstanding issues versus tabling indefinitely. Mayor Lund asked for a vote on the motion to table indefinitely. UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER -- WOLFE VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM AND COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION TIED AT TWO TO TWO. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to table the first reading of the ordinance until the issues brought up are further resolved. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she does not feel that we need to table this until a certain time. Mayor Lund asked if Council was under the sixty-day rule in this case. j Mr. Knaak stated that legislative enactment is not something to come under that rule. It is a discretionary matter, so you could postpone indefinitely without having a problem with that rule. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 14 Mr. Burns asked if we could do what Councilmember Bolkcom wants to do and determine a"no later than" date. Mr. Knaak stated that would get around the problem. There is always some date. s MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to table the first reading of the ordinance until no later than March 5. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that would give Council time to look at the issues brought up here tonight. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #00-11, BY FRIENDLY CHEVROLET, INC., FOR STORAGE OF NEW VEHICLES AND EMPLOYEE PARKING, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1160 FIRESIDE DRIVE N.E. (WARD 2): Mr. Bolin, Planner, stated that Friendly Chevrolet is requesting a special use permit to allow an automobile sales agency on the property located at 1160 Fireside Drive. The site is currently vacant and was formerly Tam's Rice Bowl. The intent is for storage of new vehicles and employee parking. The property is zoned C-3, commercial, as is Friendly Chevrolet's property on the north side of Fireside Drive. To the east and west of the site, there is a mobile home park zoned R-4 residential. To the south it is zoned M-1, light industrial. City code requires automobile sales agencies to obtain a special use permit to operate in the C-3 district. The purpose is to provide the City with discretion in determining if the use is suitable for the proposed site. Currently, Friendly Chevrolet has a special use permit on their site located at the north side of Fireside Drive. Special use permits are parcel specific, rather than owner specific. A new special use permit is required for this parcel. A special use permit would allow Friendly Chevrolet the opportunity to expand their existing use, but would allow a future landowner a separate auto sales operation for this location. Mr. Bolin stated that the Comprehensive Plan identifies this property along with the entire area surrounding this property as a potential future redevelopment area. As land use has changed in this area over the past twenty years, the City should take time to evaluate opportunities for new changes to keep them more in tune with where the City would like to be in the future. Mobile homes play an important role in affordable housing. The Comprehensive Plan states that: "The mobile home park provides a source for affordable housing and should be maintained and enhanced where possible." The Comprehensive Plan also states: "Meeting the challenges that lie ahead will require the cooperation of all segments of the community. Neighborhoods, business people, and local government need to focus on the good ofthe entire community, rather � than the parochial interests of any one area or segment of the population." Mr. Bolin stated that the real quandary is how the City balances out code prescribed requirements for landscaping and screening compatibility with the neighborhood versus what is best from a security standpoint for an automobile storage site. The required screening does not provide the direct views into the site that would help deter crime. The lighting proposed by the FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 15 Planning Commission, a yellowish type lighting, will be 20 feet in height can be seen from the adjoining property. Along the roadside of the property three foot planting or berm is required, which will screen the site. There are some properties relatively close that will see the lights in the parking lot. The petitioner's attorney at the Planning Commission meeting stated that the site could be used for a sexually oriented business but code states: "Sexually oriented businesses need to be more than 500 feet from a residential property." The site would not be appropriate. The attorney also stated that a pawn shop would also be possible on this site. It is possible as are a number of other uses without the special use process. The Planning Commission changed three of staff s recommended stipulations. They recommended the lighting to be more of a yellow shade rather than bright white. They approved the permit with stipulations unanimously. Mr. Bolin stated that Stipulation No. 8 would still be recommended to read: "All lighting shall be bollard type to minimize impact with neighboring properties." The Planning Commission changed it to read: "All lighting shall be of a type to minimize impact with neighboring properties." Staff felt that bollard type lighting would reduce impact with the neighboring property. Stipulations Nos. 13 and 14 changed the date of removal of all existing asphalt from January to July of 2001. The height of the proposed lights at 20 feet will still make them visible to neighboring properties. Staff inet with the Police Department today. Friendly Chevrolet submitted a letter last week about what they have planned for security. If Council approves this special use permit, staff would like to see an additional stipulation placed that the petitioner will work with the Police and Planning Departments to come up with an acceptable gate into the property. Mayor Lund asked what type of bollards staff ineant. Mr. Bolin stated that they meant something similar to what is outside the Municipal Center at 5 or 6 feet in height. The fencing proposed around the site will be 8 feet so you will not see the bollards outside the site. Mayor Lund stated that staff recommended privacy fencing so the cars will not be exposed to the right-of-way. Mr. Bolin stated that was correct. The petitioner has indicated that they would like to put up a border for a fence around the property. There would be less of an impact on the neighboring properties. The Police Department liked the petitioner's proposed wood fence for the three sides of the properties. It helps discourage people climbing over the fence. The Police Department would like to see more of a chain link type fence for the other side that they can see through similar to what is at the public works garage. Councilmember Wolfe asked if this is done with other car dealerships in Fridley. Mr. Bolin stated that no other dealerships do this, but The Home Depot's garden center does. The City requires three foot plantings along the street side. The questions comes down to gate style. The Police Department felt that a more secured gate would be needed of a chain link type construction they can still see through. Councilmember Wolfe asked if the gate at Friendly Chevrolet presently is a swing type gate. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22 2001 PAGE 16 Mr. Bolin stated that was correct. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the Police Department will need to stop and look through the . fence to see what is going on. Most places that sell cars have the bar across so people cannot go in there when it is closed. She asked if there were any more recommendations from the Police Department as far as a secure area. • Mr. Bolin stated that they would like to see a different gate used across the front. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she thought that the fence looks really attractive for a residential area. Mr. Bolin stated that is the quandary. Aesthetics and good compatibility to the neighborhood is important, but the Police Department recommended that it open up more in front with the chain link type gate itself. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the Police Department does not expect that from other car dealerships so why would we do that here. Mr. Hickok, Planning Coordinator, stated that crime is an issue. The Police Department indicated that crime is something they are concerned about. If you look back at the other facilities, there are no special use permits for those. Special use permits are for the health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding areas and the individuals themselves. A business would want a safe mechanism in place to make sure that the equipment is safe. Mayor Lund stated that the bar gates only stop a car, not pedestrians. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if pedestrians walk in there and steal C.D. players and other things. Mr. Hickok stated that was true. The Police Department is convinced that this type of gate would be helpful in reducing crime. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the lighting Friendly Chevrolet is recommending is similar to the lighting at the Holiday gas station that shines directly on the property but not the neighboring property. - Mr. Bolin stated that the lights at the Holiday site are casted down shield lights that the code requires. The lighting the petitioners are proposing does meet the intent of the code. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the concern is that the lights would make it more lit up so there would be less chance of criminal activity. Mr. Bolin stated that bollards would light it up just as much as one single 20-foot light. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what is wrong with their lighting proposal if it still meets code. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 17 Councilmember Wolfe asked what the difference was between using more bollards or the single 20-foot light. Mr. Bolin stated that it reduces the impact to the surrounding properties. Councilmember Bolkcom asked why it would impact so much if it meets the code and does not shine very bright. Mr. Bolin stated that a 20-foot tall light may not project more than a bollard over a property line, but when you are sitting in the residential neighborhood, you would still see that light. The bollard type lighting is not so visible because it is shielded by the fence. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the bollards really would not shine any further. Mr. Bolin stated that was correct, but when you look into the site you will not see the bollards themselves. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if any neighbors had any comments. Mr. Bolin stated that they did not receive any comments. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the City Council had discretion to change special use permits and if the property would have to meet all the requirements. Mr. Bolin stated that was correct. He said Council can place any additional stipulations they deem necessary. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that anything could happen if Friendley Chevrolet sells their property to someone else. Mr. Bolin stated that was correct. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what he meant by a poor use of spot zoning. Mr. Bolin stated that in the big picture of things it does not really fit for a piece of commercial property set between two large pieces of �esidentially zoned property. That site was an old roadhouse in the 1930's. In the 1950's the mobile home parks went up around the property. The City then zoned things according to what was already there instead of looking to the future. This is an opportunity for the City to get this parcel headed in the right direction to fit in with the City's vision of the future. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what staff visualized if the City purchased this site. Mr. Bolin stated that it would be the Council's and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's decision to buy the property. A good use to make the property more compatible would be a residential or a mixed use with higher density to residential and maybe some more commercial in it to serve that local neighborhood. Councilmember Wolfe asked if a convenience store would fit. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 18 Mr. Bolin stated that a small one would work or commercial on the main floor with apartments above or townhomes. Mobile homes or some type of apartment on the property would work too. Mr. Levahn, attorney for Friendly Chevrolet, stated that Friendly Chevrolet is a tenific business • in the community. They started in 1991. By 1997, they were the number one volume dealer in the state of Minnesota. Today they have 173 employees, and the median income is $42,000 plus � benefits. They are really good citizens and have tried to assist the City. Most recently, the Police and Fire Departments asked them to demolish Tam's building right away, which they did. They have raised over $150,000 for the Ronald McDonald House and over $60,000 for scholarships for high school seniors. They have donated more than $40,000 to the Salvation Army and raised over $20,000 for Make A Wish Foundation. They sponsor Little League and softball teams. Mr. Levahn said that they have outgrown their facility. This property became available, and they purchased it. The need is immediate for employee parking. The property is an unusual piece. The residential islands came into existence after the rest was commercial and industrial. The site as Tam's was an eyesore, and Friendly takes care of its property. C-3 is the most expansive zoning the City allows. Principal uses could be convenience stores, grocery and laundry stores, hardware and sporting goods stores, theaters, bowling alleys, mortuaries, daycare centers, hotels and motels, liquor stores, pawn shops and pawn brokers. Mr. Levahn stated that this property was on the market for at least ninety days before Friendly Chevrolet made the acquisition, so the City had the opportunity to acquire and rezone this property. Friendly Chevrolet would like to put a parking lot there. They are not suggesting they want to remove the residents from the mobile home park. They intend to fence three sides, the east, south, and west. The parking lot proposal would probably have the least intrusive impact to the neighbors than any other use mentioned. Friendly Chevrolet changed most of the lighting, parking size, and landscaping. They also changed most of what staff suggested. The neighbors like this project. Friendly Chevrolet is asking that Council follow the Planning Commission's recommendations to approve this. Friendly Chevrolet initially proposed white lights at 30 feet poles complying with the code. Those are shielded and directional. If you stand behind them you do not see the light. The technical term is spillage, and Friendly Chevrolet met the code with that. The lighting consultant suggested that the height be lowered from 30 feet to 20 feet and the wattage lowered from 250 to 150. There is still spillage at 5 to 8 feet. Mr. Levahn stated that at the Planning Commission meeting one commission member asked to consider the yellow type light. Friendly Chevrolet prefers to stay with their original plan with the 250 white light. If Council prefers, they would go down to 150 watt yellow light. The yellow light will only allow spillage of five feet. The security plan as called for by staff has been submitted. On the front of the property a gate is proposed as cement posts with chains that bind them. A car cannot get through those poles. At the driveway is the steel gate. Staff wanted some kind of chain linking, but Friendly Chev preferred the swinging gates. The vehicles placed there would mainly panel trucks and chassis, and the kinds of vehicles nobody wants to steal. These vehicles only have a radio which ceases to function after removed from the vehicles. Friendly Chevrolet's female staff is forbidden from parking across the street on that site for safety issues. 0 0 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF_JANUARY 22. 2001 PAGE 19 Councilmember Wolfe asked if the lighting was similar to the lighting across the street with the 250 watt white lighting. The lighting consultant stated that metal halide lighting is the whiter lighting and gives much better color. It does not really matter on this lot if there is high pressure sodium lighting that is yellowish or white. The bollazds are generally seen as sidewalk lighting because they are lower to the ground. There are not bollards at six or eight feet high. That would be a custom fixture manufactured for this purpose. An entire field of them would not last in Minnesota with all the snow and plowing. Lighting illuminance is not what bothers people. What bothers people is staring at the light source. Friendly Chevrolet put the shield around the light to cut the amount of light. All the fixtures are square, and the lamp is inside the fixture. Mayor Lund asked if the lighting was downcast and not directional. Councilmember Wolfe stated that it looks like the downcast light at the Municipal Center. Mayor Lund stated that staff would like a screening chain link gate as opposed to the chain with the posts and cement. He asked if staff recommended that the chain link gate go all the way across on the road side, or if the difference was just with the type of gate. N1r. Bolin stated that staff was only talking about the difference. Staff would like to work with the petitioner and the Police Department to come up with a solution that works for everybody. Councilmember Wolfe asked how the gate going into the parking lot would be different than what Friendly Chevrolet has now. Mr. Hickok stated that the concern is that it is not unusual that people actually ram through the gates to steal cars. That is one of the Police Department's concerns. That type of gate does not have as much of a deterrent as the rolling type of gate that rolls shut and locks. Crime is a problem at Friendly Chevrolet right now including car theft and break-ins. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it was reasonable to ask if the petitioners could work with staff. Mr. Hickok stated that staff will work with Friendly Chevrolet. He said this was not something that is meant to be one more thing to add to a business's expenses. Mr. Hickok said that Friendly Chev has done a fine job. He said a different gate would be for their own security and help to limit the number of crimes that happen in the community. Mayor Lund stated that it may be a small price to pay if there is some difference with the gate itself. Mr. Levahn stated that Friendly Chevrolet has had some problems coming to a consensus with staff on a number of things. Staff stated that they were not going to change the proposal on the lighting so Friendly Chevrolet had to change their's. Friendly Chevrolet has more at stake to keep this area secure. If the gate does not work, Friendly Chevrolet will upgrade the security system. He would like some of these issues resolved, if possible. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 20 Mayor Lund stated that he was very comfortable with the downcast lighting. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it mattered if the light was yellow. Mayor Lund stated that he thought it did. The residents might complain about the lighting because they were used to having a dark area. His facility is not too far from there, and the residents complained about the yellow lighting from his facility. Councilmember Barnette asked if Tam's had lighting coming from their parking lot. Mr. Stelter, petitioner, stated that they had four or five light poles. Councilmember Barnette stated that the concern for affordable housing is something we all have. He has not heard anything from the special use permit that talks about in any way impacting or taking away anything from those mobile home parks. That is a mute point. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that this could be eventually for mixed use. Councilmember Barnette stated that he thought the greatest security risk is to Friendly Chevrolet who is concerned most about security because it is money right out of their pocket. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that every time the City is investigating something that happens at Friendly Chevrolet, it takes time away from something else. It affects everyone in the City. Those all have to be reported and it is money out of everyone's pocket. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what Friendly Chevrolet is continuing to do to make sure the customers do not park out in the street on Fireside Drive. Mr. Stelter stated that he does not see that as an issue, nor does he see a lot of customers parking there during the week. On Sundays it is a problem because Friendly Chev is closed, and people want to look at the cars. They could erect some signs to alert people of the parking. With this new parking lot, Friendly Chev would have more room for the customers. Councilmember Wolfe asked if they were going to make a decision on what kind of lighting to use. He would like to see the downcast lights at 250 watts. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they could make do as long as staff understands the intention. Councilmember Wolfe asked if it would be better to specify. Mr. Bolin stated that the petitioner's letter suggests a yellowish orange shade of light at 150 watts. This letter was received after Council's mail was delivered to them. Mr. Levahn stated that this was a suggestion they made but they prefer the 250 watt white bulbs. They would rather get the special use permit, so if they have to go to the 150 watt yellow they are willing to do that. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to receive the letter. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22 2001 PAGE 21 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. . MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to approve SP #00-01 with stipulations as amended: 1) Fencing around site shall resemble the board on board fence submitted with the petitioner's � application; 2) The petitioner shall be responsible for litter control on the premises, and litter control is to occur on a daily basis; 3) Parking lot must be lined with a concrete curb; 4) All parking stalls must meet code requirements for size; 5) No employee parking allowed along Fireside Drive or the service road; 6) Final drainage, landscaping, and irrigation plans shall be submitted with the building permit application; 7) Petitioner shall execute a storm pond maintenance agreement, requiring petitioner to maintain the storm pond; 8) All lighting shall be of a type to minimize impact to neighboring properties with a 20 foot high, 150 watt yellow light; 9) The petitioner shall comply with all outdoor sales and storage provisions of Chapter 205 of the City Code; 10) The petitioner shall comply with all outdoor storage requirements; 11) The petitioner shall install underground irrigation for the landscape areas surrounding the pazking area; 12) Petitioner shall prepare and submit to the City a security plan to assure additional oversight of the storage lot and to deter crime to property and �uork with staff; 13) All existing asphalt shall be removed by July 1, 2001; and 14) No parking shall occur on the subject parcel after July 1, 2001, until all required improvements have been completed. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. � Councilmember Bolkcom stated that yellow lights make sense and are less intrusive. Councilmember Wolfe stated that white light does not affect the neighbors anymore, it is downcast on the lot. White goes aesthetically with what they have there. Mayor Lund said he thought Friendly Chevrolet should stick with the yellow lights. White light is more reflective and it lightens the whole area. He understands the need for the white light in sales because it shows much better. He would hate to see residents complain about the light after it is installed. Councilmember Wolfe stated that the fence would deter some of the light. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she would not vote for the motion if the light is not changed to the yellow color. She said she agreed with Mayor Lund. Councilmember Wolfe asked Friendly Chevrolet how they felt about the lighting. Mayor Lund stated that they are happy with the special use permit and are willing to make a few concessions. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to amend Stipulation No. 8 as follows: All lighting shall of the type to minimize impact to neighboring properties with a 20 foot high, 250 watt, yellow light. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. Ms. Connie Metcalfe, 860 Moore Lake Drive, stated that she wanted to commend staff for having concern for affordable housing built. She said that residents need to know the desperate FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22 2001 PAGE 22 need for affordable housing. She appreciates the smaller lighting for the residents there and the concern shown for the yellow lighting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE ' MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 0 Mayor Lund asked for a vote on the main motion with the stipulations as amended. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 14. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Councilmember Bolkcom wished to thank everyone who attended the meeting last Thursday on commuter rail. We will wait for further information to come forward. Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that Columbia Heights School District No. 13 Superintendent, Dave Behlow, sent a letter suggesting that Fridley join with Columbia Heights for a joint task force meeting on Thursday March 8. Other dates are March 23 and March 29. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE JANUARY 22, 2001, CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:19 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Signe L. Johnson Scott J. Lund Recording Secretary - Mayor CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JANUARY 17, 2001 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the January 17, 2001, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Diane Savage, Barb Johns, Leroy Oquist, Dave Kondrick Members Absent: Dean Saba, Larry Kuechle, Connie Modig Others Present: Paul Bolin, Planner Allan Stahlberg, 8055 Riverview Terrace APPROVE THE DECEMBER 20 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to approve the December 20, 2000, Planning Commission meeting minutes as presented. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat, PS #00-03, by David Lopez, to create two residential lots, generally located at 35 62"d Way. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, 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. Mr. Bolin stated that David Lopez, the property owner, is seeking to replat the property at 35 62"d Way into two single family lots. Currently, it is one rather large single lot with a single family home that would remain on the proposed Lot 2. There is an older garage that would be left on the proposed Lot 1. Fridley requires that lots in the R-1, single family district, be a minimum of 75 feet in width with a minimum lot area of 9,000 square feet. The proposed Lot 1 would be 103.5 feet wide and 13,360 square feet in size, and the proposed Lot 2 would be 78 feet wide and 9,778 square feet in size. Mr. Bolin stated that the property is on the north side of 62"d Way, a block from East River Road. The properties to the north and south are zoned R-1. The rail line is to the east of the property. There are a couple of nice large trees on this site. Staff recommends approval with stipulations. The lots exceed the minimum size requirement providing additional home ownership opportunities for Fridley residents. Mr. Bolin stated there is enough room on the proposed Lot 2 to either run a driveway off 62"a Way or come in from the unimproved alleyway. 1 PLANNING CObiMiSSION MEETING January 17 2001 PAGE 2 Mr. Kondrick asked if there were any complaints or objections. Mr. Bolin stated that a comment was received from one neighbor who lives no�th of this property. The neighbor feels the petitioner has done a nice job of fixing up the existing home and is excited about the prospect of another new home and more remodeling happening in the neighborhood. No negative comments were received. Mr. David Lopez stated he did not have any problems with the stipulations. He bought the property to upgrade it and turn it around to be a nicer place Mr. Kondrick asked Mr. Lopez when he planned to start construction. Mr. Lopez stated he did not know. Either his construction company will do construction on the new property, or he will sell the property to recoup the money spent to fix up the inside of the current house. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Johns, 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 7:41 P.M. Mr. Kondrick stated this would be a nice improvement for the neighborhood and the property, and he had no problems with the request. Ms. Savage stated she had no problems with it either. Mr. Oquist also stated that he had no problems with this request. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconcted by Mr. Oquist, to recommend approval Preliminary Plat, PS #00-03, by David Lopez, to create two residential lots, generally located at 35 62"d Way. 1. The petitioner shall obtain all the necessary permits prior to construction. 2. The petitioner shall remove existing garage from proposed Lot 1 prior to applying to the City for final plat approval. 3. The petitioner shall construct a hard surface drive and code-required_double car garage on proposed Lot 2, by November 1, 2001. Furthermore, the petitioner shall submit a performance bond to the City of Fridley in the amount of $25,000 to ensure construction of the driveway and garage. 4. A grading and drainage plan shall be approved by the City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties. 5. Silt fencing shall be used where applicable during construction on proposed Lot 1. 6. The petitioner shall pay a$1,500 park dedication fee prior to issuance of a building permit for proposed Lot 1. 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 home shall be marked and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permits. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING January 17 2001 PAGE 3 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-04, by the City of Fridley to create a new 0-5 Overlay District to permit expansion and new construction on lots created and recorded prior to December 29, 1955, that are befinreen 5,000 and 7,499 square feet in size. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Oquist, 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 7:45 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated this is the proposed overlay district which would be known as the 0-5 Overlay District. Being an older City that lacks tracts of undeveloped land, it is imperative to explore different ways to preserve and enhance existing housing stock. One of the best ways to preserve the older housing stock would be to create this Overlay District. The older non- conforming prope�ties due to their lot size would have their non-conforming status removed so people can rebuild if their house burns down. People could also then put money into their homes without fear of losing their investment in case of a fire. He stated that in the past four years, three lots would have met this criteria when homes burned down. The property owners had to sell the property to the neighbors; because, with the current codes, they could not rebuild. Mr. Bolin stated the criteria for inclusion of a lot in the 0-5 Overlay District is that the lot needs to be created and recorded in Anoka County prior to December 29, 1955. People who own a number of 50-foot lots now are not going to be able to subdivide those lots and create additional lots and density. This recognizes those lots between 5,000 and 7.500 square feet that are currently non-conforming. This also requires that these lots have a minimum lot width of 50 feet. It would be a 65-foot requirement for a corner lot. Approximately 204 lots between 5,000 and 7,499 square feet in size are located outside the Hyde Park Addition that a�e both developed and vacant. Out of those 204 lots, there is no breakdown of how many existing homes are on them or vacant. In some cases, it may not be possible to develop some of these sites. One hundred ten lots are located in the Riverview Heights neighborhood, and ten lots are located in the Plymouth Addition. Staff is working with the GIS department to further narrow down the properties. __ Mr. Bolin stated that Hyde Park is excluded from the Overlay District because past concerns with substandard lot sizes led to the creation of the S-1 Hyde Park neighborhood regulations in 1976. The S-1 Hyde Park neighborhood was developed by a neighborhood task force who determined that they would like a 7,500 square foot minimum lot size. They reduced the minimum lot width down to 60 feet. The 0-5 standards also maintains a 25-foot front and rear yard setback. Hyde Park allows a 768 square foot minimum home size. Staff believes that would be appropriate in the new 0-5 Overlay District as well. The 0-5 standard applies to new construction on vacant lots that meet this requirement. It would also apply to existing homes that are non-conforming. Mr. Bolin stated some opponents to these changes are saying that 20 - 30 years from now, new houses on these lots will look run down just like some of the existing homes in some of these neighborhoods. The housing market is completely different today from 40 - 100 years ago when many of these smaller homes were built as cottages. Construction of a new home is very expensive and represents a large investment that the owner will maintain. Another comment heard is that suburbs are supposed to have space, and these houses will be right on top of the 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, January 17, 2001 PAGE 4 houses next door. Staff has seen one story ramblers on 75 foot wide lots get wider every year as people add onto their garages and homes. This does not seem to be a problem from a streetscape point of view and the City has to adapt to changes. The same side yard setbacks will be maintained. These homes will not be any closer to the existing neighboring homes than in any other portion of the City. Another comment is that these lots have no depth and how can a reasonable house and garage be built on them. There are very practical places for a reasonable size home and a garage on these lots. Mr. Bolin stated staff is recommending approval of the 0-5 Overlay District, because it provides housing options and choices. Homes on non-conforming lots become a lost investment. People come to the City monthly for a permit to expand their homes or remodel; but they then realize that if their homes burn down, they could lose their investment. It has created situations where there are rundown homes, because there is no incentive to maintain the homes. It also gives the City, HRA, and residents more flexibility in developing and creating housing. It does not increase the density. Mr. Kondrick asked Mr. Bolin why it would not increase the density. Mr. Bolin stated that it may increase the number of people and homes built, but additional lots would not be created. These lots are existing. Tax forfeiture of these sub-standard lots has a cost for the neighborhood and the City. Lot width does not dictate home value. New neighborhoods in the outer suburbs have $300,000 homes on 60-foot lots. Ms. Savage asked what has been done to publish this new district. Mr. Bolin stated that it is advertised in the paper for two weeks prior to this week's meeting. Staff has received no responses to the publication. Mr. Allan Stahlberg, 8055 Riverview Te�race, stated that he hates to see anything smaller than a 50-foot lot minimum right now. There is a house just shoe-horned into the small lot near his house with the driveway running alongside the house. He pities anybody who has to snowblow that driveway. It looks terrible. These little houses that people are not taking care of are worth $70,000 at least. People are fixing them up left and right. The City paid $40,000 for his neighbor's house, and it is now a level lot again. He cannot see where putting more houses on smaller lots will be an asset to the City. The City has been approving big garages and kids cannot park in long narrow driveways. He has never heard of anybody not being able to rebuild a house on a lot if it burns down. That is a scare tactic by the City. If there are standing walls and a foundation, you can rebuild it. That is not friendly to the residents. Mr. Kondrick asked Mr. Stahlberg if he was for the 50-foot minimum lot size or against it. Mr. Stahlberg stated that he is against anything less than 50 feet. Mr. Kondrick stated that the minimum lot width is 50 feet wide. It is currently 75 feet. Mr. Stahlberg stated that if the house he is talking about has a lot size of 50 feet, it is too small a lot size. Mr. Kondrick stated that this is a new deal. Mr. Stahlberg stated that 50 feet is too small. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING January 17, 2001 PAGE 5 Mr. Kondrick stated that the lots have to have some depth to meet the square footage requirement. You have to figure out how to put on a house and garage on the 50-foot lot. Mr. Stahlberg stated that with increased traffic problems, people are moving back in to the City. Fridley does not have the responsibility to provide housing for everyone. Mr. Kondrick stated they are talking about 200 lots. He believed they should combine these lots whenever possible. Mr. Stahlberg stated that if these lots were combined, you would get more taxes out of them in the long run. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Johns, 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 7:05 P.M. Mr. Oquist stated that to combine the lots, they are assuming that there are two non-conforming lots right next to each other, and that may not be the case. Instead of having the driveway along the side, the driveway could be in the front with a finro car garage in front of the house. There are lots of ways to develop a property. People own these properties, and they need to be able to develop on them or the City is going to have to buy all 300 lots. With new construction today, some very nice houses can be developed. He believed this is something the City needs to do. Ms. Savage agreed. Mr. Kondrick stated that he grew up in northeast Minneapolis on a 40-foot lot with a nice size home that sold last year for $93,000. It is possible to get a nice size home on these lots. This will give a good mix of people that can afford nice housing and people will be closer to their workplaces. Ms. Johns stated she also thought this was a good idea. It provides a good oppo�tunity for starter homes for young couples and helps people to take an extra effort to make them look better. Ms. Savage stated that this change reflects existing trends. Fridley is not the suburb that it was at one time and people are looking for an urban type of community and places to walk to in central areas. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to approve the Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #00-04, by the City of Fridley to create a new 0-5 Overlay District to permit expansion and new construction on lots created and recorded prior to December 29, 1955, that are between 5,000 and 7,499 square feet in size. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, January 17, 2001 PAGE 6 3. RECEIVE THE_ MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 7. 2000. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive the minutes of the December 7, 2000, Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Johns, to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE JANUARY 17, 2001, PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED AT 8:17 P.M. Respectfully submitted, U + o� • ;c�,v Si�e L. Joh on �;,j Recording Secretary � r a CfTY OF FRIDLEY DATE: TO: FROM AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 January 31, 2001 � � ) ��, William W. Burns, City Manager Scott Hickok, Acting Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planner RE: Preliminary Plat, PS-00-03, David Lopez INTRODUCTION On January 17, 2001, the Planning Commission considered preliminary plat request PS-00-03, by David Lopez. Mr. Lopez intends to subdivide the property located at 35 62°d Way. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of PS-00-03, with 8 stipulations. SUMMARY OF REQUEST 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 103' in width and 13,360 square feet in size after the replat. The proposed Lot #2, which contains an existing home, will be 77' in width and 9,653 square feet in size after the property is divided. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of PS-00-03, with the 8 stipulations listed below. 1 Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2 3 � S. 6. Petitioner shall remove existing garage from proposed Lot 1 prior to applying to the City for final plat approval. Petitioner shall construct a hard surface drive & code reguired double car garage on proposed Lot 2, by November 1, 2001. Furthermore, petitioner shall submit a performance bond to the City of Fridley in the amount of $25, 000 to ensure construction of drive & garage. 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. During construction on proposed Lot 1, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. Petitioner to pay $1,500 park dedication fee prior to issuance of bzcilding permit for proposed Lot 1. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 7 8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new home shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits, : City of Fridley Land Use Application PS-00-03 January 17, 2001 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: David Lopez 512 5`h Street NE St. Cloud, NIN 56304 Requested Action: Replat of property to create 2 lots for single family home development. E�sting Zoning: R-1 Single Family Residential Locarion: 35 62"d Way NE. Size: 23,013 square feet .52 acres Existing Land Use: Home on W'/z, E'/z Vacant. Si.urounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family, R-1 E: Railroad, M-1 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 peimitted in this zoning district, with a minimum lot size of 9,000 square feet. Zoning History: • 1886 — Lot is platted 1950 — Home is built • 1958 & 1959 — Home additions Legal Description of Property: E. 30' of Lot 18; Lots 19-21, Blk 18, Fridley Park Council Action / 60 Day Action: February 5, 2001 / February 12, 2001 Public Utilities: Located near property. �� Transportation: Properties are accessed via 62"d Way. Physical Characteristics: Typical suburban landscaping. SUMMARY OF REQUEST Dave Lopez, petitioner, is seeking to replat the property located at 35 62"d Way into 2 single family lots. SUMNTARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this plat request, with stipulations. � Lots exceed minimum size requirements. • Provides additional homeownership opportunities for Fridley residents. (view of properly from south) Staff Report Prepared by. Paul Bolin PS #00-03 Analysis Dave Lopez, petitioner, is seeking to replat the property located at 35 62°d Way 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 103' in width and 13,360 square feet in size after the replat. The proposed Lot #2, will be 7T in width and 9,653 square feet in size after the properiy is divided. The proposed Lot 1 contains a dilapidated garage that will need to be removed from the site prior to final plat approval. City code does not permit accessory buildings on any lot prior to the time of the issuance of the building peimit for the construction of the principal building. The garage is also open to trespass in violation of State statutes and all openings must be immediately boarded up to prevent trespass unril the petitioner removes the garage. The proposed Lot 2, which contains the existing home, does not provide for off street parking or a double garage as required by City Code. City code states that a"minimum of two off-street parking stalls shall be provided for each dwelling unit". Code further states "all lots having a minimum lot area of 9,000 square feet or resulting from a lot split shall have a double garage". This means that the City must ensure that a hard surfaced drive and a two car garage be constructed on the proposed Lot 2 and is requiring a$25,000 performance bond. The "snowbird" parking ordinance, which prohibits overnight parking on City streets between November 1& May 1, makes it imperarive that the drive and garage be constructed by November 1, 2001. (Photos: Left, View from South; Right, View from East.) Staff Recommendation Ciry Staff recommends approval of this plat request, with stipa�lations. • Lots exceed minimum size requirements. • Does provide additional homeownership opportunities for Fridley residents. 10 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. Petitioner shall remove existing garage from proposed Lot 1 prior to applying to the City for final plat approval. 3. Petitioner shall construct a hard surface drive & code required double car garage on proposed Lot 2, by November 1, 2001. Furthermore, petitioner shall submit a performance bond �to the City of Fridley in the amoa�nt of $25, 000 to ensure construction of drive & garage. 4. 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. S. During construction on proposed Lot 1, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner to pay $1,500 park dedication fee prior to issuance of building permit for proposed Lot 1. 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 home shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 11 ;�', f e� �� j,,`' r.;n': j�� :� ' , . . ' t' ' , t j �( ! ' .' - 4��* i A'�� JO-et6 A�, . ` , ��.. ' V� I�:. ,fya' � ld��-,;' � . r, R ,it�i�.r► �..,s,W. .. .. •.. ti�' �auccM;;a ' I I I I I ( I N01 H S � °£ m d � _� � � —_ a_�`��-----------_ I '.. -� :> ----- , . --J �—� t' M„5Q, b0 Z S -�-------- I ---- O 'b5'SZl � _---- J`y � i---------------- —�_----� ( I � � � � I ' I ',' I I I ` ~ ~ ' Z� ��- =w I �� 09 I �� I�Jti� �'� C� J w N � i a � ( o.�' *, Z w i u� I � � io , �°--{ a i � � ° � � � I � � � -.v I , � �� ` � —� ------- -----� � IW ---------------- i— ----- ---� --I � M O, o�aa � � I(� , IN q�� . .� � I � i n ao -;,-',v �bd'b m �� ( � j �� ao , '� � `�: i � I . .- `,; � � `- --------- �-Z? - 'n � '� I � � ' I I � — --------------�--- I Z �--`-�' - ----- L£_SZL__ � � ° � � i �-----------� � � -- ------- � —�----i—- °D � ' � � � ' � � �J� I � � I � � o'eZ S£'0£1— . I I � w ° �)� � � I IJ . _ � J m � � <� � w � �� I a '' � " o � I I , I•` �- �- ° N Q o i o ; � � �- , `,�-�, � w � Q � Q � • � � < I . v ,d � c I� v I ti ; I r ' a w`` ------ =-- --�- � ' I�.\a -- �Q — � � I w � , a I I � � xi 0'bZ y i Ol y � � S, Q ' � � � I, -_-- � __' � __ � — "'--________ � J� ' � � ! ' I � ? �£'SZl I ' I � � � I M„£b,90 l N W� i I-------------�----� m W� Z� � 8l 101 �0 133� 0'0£ 1S`v3 �0 3NIl 1S3M I � �'� I Z � � = I �I U r' �� I I Q � W' �� ~I � Zj a� r ` 3, �- - 12 N` .� �� .o O N � 0 �� f� M �- . � M o� � uu Y Y 00 mm N � �� 00 J J / � CfTY OF • FRIDLEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 William W. Burns, City Manager R�� 4� Jon . aukaas, Public Works Director January 23, 2001 Agreement for Railroad Crossing on 77`h Avenue PWOI-014 The Burlington Northem and Santa Fe Railway Company has approached the City with an agreement whereby the existing timber railway crossing at 77te Avenue would be torn out and replaced with a concrete crossing. The BNSF has asked in their agreement for the City to pay approximately 30% of the cost of the concrete crossing plus pave the bituminous approach surfaces. In discussing this with other cities, this is a standard arrangement for crossing upgrades. The cost share to the City of Fridley for this work is $28,800. Recommend the City Council approve the attached agreement between the Ciry of Fridley and the Burlington iv'orthern and Santa Fe Railway Company in the arr�ount of $28,800. JHH:cz � 13 AGREEMENT FOR THE INSTALLATION OF FULL DEPTH CONCRETE CROSSING SURFACE MATERIAL ON THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE R:IILWAY CO�IPANY 77'� Avenue ON U Nlinnesota , DOT # 082804N AT Fridlev , MP 18.10 This is a letter agreement wherein The Burlineton Northern and Santa Fe Railwav Comuanv, hereinafter called Company, agrees that the existing crossing surface at��s to be removed and new full depth concrete crossing surface to be installed to a crossing surface length of 48' per track , for a total crossing surface length of 96' . To accomplish this work, the City of Fridlev , hereinafter�calle Agency, and the Company, agree as follows: ♦ 1) The work will be performed at the expense of the Company. Said work will consist of the installation of concrete crossing surface material including upgrades to the track to accommodate new concrete crossing surface material, to adequately include all vehicular driving lanes. ♦ 2) The Agency will pay the Company 300 per foot for the total crossing surface length for work described above for a total cost of $ 28.800 ♦ 3) The Company will order the concrete crossing surface material from a qualified supplier and after receipt of the material, the Agency will be billed on basis of Paragraph 2 above. ♦ 4) The Company, at its own cost and expense, will maintain the crossing surface in a satisfactory manner and will make ample provisions for such maintenance, provided, however, that the Company shall be entitled to receive any contribution towazd the cost of such maintenance as may be now or hereafter made available by reason of any law, ordinance, regulation, order, grant, or by other means or sources. ♦ 5) The Agency, at its own cost and expense, will provide all bazricades, lights, flagmen or traffic control devices necessary for detouring vehicular traffic at the crossing, during construction of fhe crossing involved. ♦ 6) The Agency further agrees to allow the Company to drain the crossing area into existing Agency storm sewers, if avai.lable, neaz the crossing. The drain pipes and filter fabric will be furnished and installed by the Company. ♦ 7) ' The Agency, further agrees to furnish and place, at their expense, asphalt between the saw cut in the ezisting roadway surface and the new concrete crossing surface, plus the area between the tracks if there is more than one track. ♦ 8) The Agency agents or contractors to obtain Insurance as specified on Exhibit-"E" prior to the Agency, or its agents or concractors performing any construction work on the Company's property. Flagman shall be required when working within 25' of the track . The Agency agents or contractors to contact BNSF local roadmaster to arrange for the flagman. Roadmaster Ron Radika Telephone number 320-259-3235. ♦ 9) Both parties agree to the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which by reference is made a pazt of this agreement. The work proposed above is agreeable to the Company under the terms and consideration stated herein. If this is satisfactory and agreeable to the Agency, please indicate concurrence in the space provided. T'he Burlington Northern and Santa Fe City/County State Railway Company Title Date � Manager Public Projects Date EXHIBIT "E" INSURANCE AND FLAGGING REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTIOIV PROJECTS ON OR ADJACENT TO PROPERTY OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SAti'TA FE RAILWAY COMPANY SECTION 1. INSURANCE. (a). Before commencing any work under this Agreement, Contractor must provide and maintain in effect throughout the term of this Agreement insurance, at Contractor's expense, covering all of the work and services to be performed hereunder by Contractor and e�ch of its subcontractors, as described below: ( i). Workers' Compensation coverage as is required by State law. THE CERTIFICATE MUST CONTAIN A SPECIFIC WAIVER OF THE INSURANCE COMPANY'S SUBROGATION RIGHTS AGAINST THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY (2). Commercial General Liability insurance covering liability, including but not limited to Public Liability, Personal Injury, Property Damage and Contractual Liability covering the obligations assumed by Contractor in Section 1, with coverage of at least $2,000,000 per occurrence and $4,000,000 in the aggregate. Where explosion, collapse, or underground hazazds aze involved, the X, C, and U exclusions must be removed from the policy. (3). Automobile Liability insurance, including bodily injury and property damage, with coverage of at least $1,000,000 combined single limit or the equivalent covering any and all vehicles owned or hired by the Contractor and used in performing any of the services under this agreement. (4). Railroad Protective Liability insurance stating The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company is the Named Insured covering all of the liability assumed by the Contractor under the provisions of this Agreement with coverage of at least $2,000,000 per occurrence and $6,000,000 in the aggregate. Coverage shall be issued on a standard ISO form CG 00 35 O1 96 and endorsed to include ISO form CG 28 31 10 93 and the Limited Seepage and Pollution Endorsement (see section i. below). (b). The average train traffic per 24-hour period on this route is 17 freight trains at a timetable speed of 79 MPH and 2 passenger trains at a timetable speed of 79 MPH and 0 switch engine movements. (c). All insurance shall be placed with insurance companies licensed to do business in the States in which the work is to be performed, and with a current Best's Insurance Guide Rating of A- and Class VII, or better. (d). In all cases except Workers' Compensation and Railroad Protective Liability coverage the certificate must specifically state that THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY IS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED. (e) Any coverage afforded Railway, the Certificate Holder, as an Additional Insured shall appiy as primary and not excess to any coverage issued in the name of Railway. (fj. Such insurance shall be approved by the Railway before any work is performed on Railway's Property and shall be carried until all work required to be performed on or adjacent to Railway's Property under the terms of the contract is satisfactorily completed as determined by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and thereafter until all tools, equipment and materials not belonging to the Railway, have been removed from Railway's Property and Railway Property is (eft in a clean and presentable condition. The insurance herein required shall be obtained by the Contractor and Contractor shall furnish Railway with an original certificate of insurance, signed by the insurance company, or its authorized representative, evidencing the issuance of insurance coverage as prescribed in (a) 1, 2 and 3 above, plus the original Railroad Protective Liability insurance policy to: February 11, 2000 15 Attention: Insurance Approvals Engineering Services The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company 4515 Kansas Avenue Kansas City, Kansas 66106 (g). The certificate of insurance shall guarantee that the policies will not be amended, altered, modified or canceled in so far as the coverage contemplated hereunder is concerned, without at least thirty (30) days notice mailed by re�istered mail to Railway. (h). Full compensation for all premiums which the Contractor is required to pay on all the insurance described hereinafter shall be considered as included in the prices paid for the various items of work to be performed under the Contract, and no addidonal allowance wil( be made therefor or for additional premiums which may be required by extensions of the policies of insurance. (i). Limited seepage, pollution, and contamination coverage endorsement wording. In consideration of the premium chazged it is understood and agreed that Exclusion f. of Section 1. of this Policy shall not apply to the liability of the Insured resulting from seepage and/or pollution and/or contamination caused solely by: (1). unintended fire, lightning or explosion: or (2). a collision or overturning of a road vehicle: or (3). a collision or overturning or derailment of a train. Notwithstanding the foregoing it is agreed that the coverage provided by this Endorsement shall not apply to: 1. loss of, damage to or loss of use of property direcdy or ind'uectly resulting from sub-surface operations of the Insured, and/or removal of, loss of or damage to sub-surface oil, gas or any other substance; 2. any site or location used in whole or in part for the handling, processing, treatment, storage, disposal or dumping of any waste materials or substances; 3. the cost of evaluating and/or monitoring and/or controlling seeping and/or polluting and/or contaminating substances; 4. the cost of removing and/or nullifying and/or cieaning up seeping and/or polluting and /or contaminating substances on property at any time owned and/or leased and/or rented by the insured and/or under the control of the Insured. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Item 1 does not apply to tunnels. It is further distinctly understood and agreed by the Conuactor that its liability to the Railway herein under SECTION 1 will not in any way be limited to or affected by the amount of insurance obtained and carried by the Contractor in connection with said Contract. SECTION 2. PROTECTION OF RAILWAY FACILITIES AND RAILWAY FLAGGER SERVICES (a). The Contractor shall give a minimum of at least thirty (30) working days notice to Ron Radika . the Railway's Roadmaster, at telephone 320-259-3235 , in advance of when flagging services will be required to bulletin February 11, 2000 16 the tlaggers position and shal( provide five (5) working days notice to the Ruadmaster to abolish the position per union requirements. (b). Railway flagger and protective services and devices will be required and furnished when Contractor's work activities are tocated over or under of and within twenty-five (25) feet measured horizontally from center line of the nearest track and when cranes or similaz equipment positioned outside of 25-foot horizontally from track center line that could foul the track in the event of tip over or other catastrophic occurrence, but not limited thereto for the following conditions: (1). When in the opinion of the Railway's representative, it is necessary to safeguard Railway's Property, employees, trains, engines and facilities. (2). When any excavation is performed below the bottom of tie elevation, if, in the opinion of Railway's representative, track or other Railway facilities may be subject to movement or settlement. (3). When work in any way interferes with the safe operation of trains at timetable speeds. (4). When any hazazd is presented to Railway track, communications, signal, electrical, or other facilities either due to persons, material, equipment or blasting in the vicinity. (5). Special permission must be obtained from the Railway before moving heavy or cumbersome objects or equipment which might result in making the track impassable. (c). Flagging services will be performed by qualified Railway flaggers. The base cost per hour for (1) flagger is $50.00 which includes vacation allowance, paid holidays, Railway and Unemployment: Insurance, Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance, health and welfaze benefits, transportation, meals, lodging and supervision, for an eight (8) hour basic day with time and one-half or double time for overtime, rest days and holidays. These rates are subject to any increases which may result from Railway Employees-Railway Management negotiations or which may be authorized by Federal authorities. State/Contractor will be bilied on actual costs in effect at time work is performed. (1). A flagging crew generally consists of cne emptoyee. However, additional personnel may be required to protect Railway Property and operations, if deemed necessary by the Rai1'way's representative. (2). Each time a flagger is called, the minimum period for billing shall be the eight (8) hour basic day. (3). T'he cost of flagger services provided by the Railway, when deemed necessary by the Railway's representative, will be borne by the State/Contractor. (4). The average train traffic per 24-hour period on this route is 17 freight trains at a timetable speed of 79 MPH and 2 passenger trains at a timetable speed of 79 MPH and 0 switch engine movements. February 11, 2000 17 Recreation and Natural Resource Department em 0 To: William W. Burns Cit Mana er �� y g fi From: Jack Kirk, Director of Recreation and Natural Resources ,�� Date: February 2, 2001 Re: CDBG Youth Scholarship Program The Recreation and Natural Resource Department has submitted an application to Anoka County for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding of the Youth Recreation Scholarship Program. The funds would be made available to low and moderate income families to supplement or waive fees of youth participating in the recreation programs and trips sponsored by the Recreation Department. In the past several years, CDBG funds have provided approximately $5000 (per year) for this youth scholarship program. There have been an increasing number of requests for scholarships each year and with a larger dollar amount available, we should be able to service more Fridley youth with the financial assistance. Therefore, this year's application to Anoka County for the CDBG program is $7500. It is expected that the Youth Scholarship Program will service at least 130 Individuals in our community and affect at least 70 different households. Attached is the completed application form as submitted to Anoka County. It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council of the-City of Fridley support the submittal of this CDBG application and pass a motion in support of the application to Anoka County. : CITYOF FRiDLEY FRIDLEY NtUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UN[VERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55-�32 •(6l2) 571-3450 • EAX (6t2) 571-1287 January 26, 2001 Ms. Jennifer Bergman Anoka County Community Development Director Government Center — 7`�' Floor 2100 3`� Avenue Anoka, MN 55303 Dear Ms. Bergman: This letter is to inform you of the City of Fridley Recreation Department's intent to apply for 2001-2002 Community Development Block Grant Funds. The grant will be used to support the participation of low and moderate income youth in the activities offered by the City Recreation Department. This program provides an opportunity to participate in meanin�ful recreation pro�rams regardless of economic status. The Fridley City Council will review the application at the February 5, 2001 City Council meeting. Council meeting minutes will be forwarded to you for attachment to the application. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, �� l Jack Kirk Director of Recreation and Natura! Resources 19 ��C � �� Debi Campobasso Pro�ram Supervisor Anoka County Competitive Municipal CDBG Program FY 2001 Aaalication for Assistance I. ' General Infoi�ri�tioti� Applicant Name: City of Fridley Address: 6431 University Avenue NE City: Fridley State2ip: MN 55432 �.��►a��=�;:�s*��,�t'.�a�u�M+��:�.. �� . . . _ . .. .. . .,.._ . . ._ .. _ .:, ... . _ Contact Person Name and Title: Jack Kirk, Recreation & Nat. Res. Director Phone: 763-572-3575 Fax: 763-571-1287 E-Mail: kirk'�ci.fridle .mn.us Altemate Contact Person: , Debi Cam obasso i Phone: 763-572-3574 i Project Title: Youth Recreation Scholarship Program Project Description:Funds would be available for residents, who meet low to moderate income requirements, to supplement or waive fees for recreational programs and trips sponsored by Fridley Recreation. CDBG Funds Requested: $7,500 Project Location: Total Cost of Project: $10,000 City of Fridley Recreation Department Which Eligible Activity Will Your Project Meet: � Acquisition � Disposition � Public Facilities and Improvements � Clearance and Demolition � Rehabilitation Activities � Code Enforcement � Historic Preservation � Renovation of Closed Buildings � Lead-Based Paint Testing and Abatement � Activities Related to Economic Development � Planning � � Public Service 20 . � i Which National Objective Will Your Project Meet: � Benefitting Low/Moderate Income: (if you check this box, you must check one below, answer following question only if the box is checked) ❑ Area Benefit A. In what Census Tract(s) and Block Group(s) is your project located (include maps)?_1. 511-�i , �,�, :-^��o; �� , �,—Q.r''.�-^��.03, 512.05, 512.04 B. How many residents live in this area? 28,000 C. S? 100% D. 1�(haLIIocumentatiort.tlidth�Agency use? Neither, beneficiaries need to meet income requirements in order to� utilize the program. HUD Data Survey lf a survey was used, p/ease attach completed survey ❑ Limited Clientele (at least 51 % of the people served must be low to moderate income) A. How many people do you anticipate serving in the upcoming year? B. Of those people, how many will be served with CDBG funds? C. [3ees-�Fiis project benefit any specialized population such as: �isabled _ Elderly Homeless Other ❑ Housing ❑ Economic Development (at least 51 % of the jobs must be made available to low to moderate income people and one job must be created for every $25,000 in funds ❑ Reduce or Eliminate Slum or Blight: (if you check this box, you must check one � below) � Area Basis (please include census track map or survey results) � Spot Basis (please attach photos of the project) ❑ Urban Renewal (must be a HUD designated area) ❑ Urgent Need 21 How Will income Be Income verification Request Forms Presumed Benefit Census Track Data Survev 22 A. Which Category Best Describes Your Project (Select from Housing or Community Development Goals and Priorities Charts attached): Yn� i4F� Ccnii�ne nr �`.hilri C:ara �ANtGAS B. What Priority Was This Category Assigned? � High � � Medium � Low C. Describe Why Your Project Fits Into This Category. Many of the types of programs City residents use the scholarship program for include after-schooi activities, summer activities and all day trips throughout the summer and on non-school days. These programs help parents keep their children in supervised programs and resist the opportunity to leave them home unsupervised when they are working and school is not in session. Because participants only qualify for the � scholarship program if they are low to moderate income, 100% of the participation meet CDBG income guidelines. 23 i v. rro�ect �uaget Totai Project Cost: $ � �AA Total CDBG Funds: $ 7_500 % of CDBG Funds in Total Cost: 75% Source of Funds Amount City of Fridley $2,500 CDBG $7,500 $ $ f��'1 . Maximum Rent - FMR Monthly Contract Rent Number of Units Size per sq. ft. Property Acquisition Costs Purchase Price: Closing Costs: Other Acquisition Costs: Subtotal: Construction Costs: (please note that CDBG funds cannot be used for new constructionl Site Improvements: Construction: Permits: Other Construction Costs: Subtotal: 24 Acquisition/Rehabilitation � Pubiic Service Planning Committed Pending �'�:l Total :� . :' ' CDBG Funds Requested Totat � CDBG Funds Requested 0 Professional Fees or Personnel Costs . Architect/Engineer: Survey: � Hazardous Material Survey: Appraisal: . Legal: Project Manager: Other Professional Fees: Subtotal: 0 � Total C'JII�ICI`�i@JCCi.YV1YI�'JF��vr�aAVV�7cv �:=::wr•-�,�.v.: , . _ .�c,-a�er; !��*f-z—r �tu�nadN�MVaJ,...,.>s � Relocation: Financing Eosts: Environmental Review or Study: Other: Subtotal: Total: COMPLETE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE PROJECTS ONLY Personnel Total Operations Salaries: Fringe Benefits: FICA: Health Insurance: Worker's Compensation: Unemployment: Other: Subtotal: -0- Total Rent: Equipment: 1,300.00 Insurance: � CDBG Funds Requested CDBG Funds Requested CDBG � Phone/Fax: Postage: Printing: Supplies/Materials: 1,200.00 -0- ` Travel and Expenses: Contract Services: 7,500.00 $7,500.00 Other: Subtotal: � $10,000.00 Totai: I $10,000.00 COMPLETE FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS ONLY Professionai Services: Project Management: Other: Total: � � V ... �-..+.-�. .� . _ .. -r+et�.:.. - z�•. .•� �w . _.. .. _J.e^-. � rn.e. _ . Y.r..+�. �c ��..._._ . .._.. .. . � . Ce ification "°' _ �+.�-��: .�� - I certify that the information contained in this application is true and correct and that it _ contains no misrepresentations, falsifications, intentional omissions, or concealment of material facts. I further certify that no contracts have been awarded, funds committed or construction begun on the proposed project, and that none wifl be prior to issuance of a Release of Funds bv the proqram administrator. �� Signature of Authorized Official William W. Bums • Name of Authorized Official City Manager Title � f 27 anuarv 25. 2001 Date City of Fridley Recreation Department Scholarship Program 1. What is the goal of this project? To ensure all residents have the opportunity to participate in recreation programs regardless of economic status. 2. Who will benefit from this project? Low to moderate income youth. Income verification is completed on the Scholarship application form by each participant. 3. Describe the applicant and the extent and length of experience the applicant has in developing, managing, and/or administering similar activities. The Fridley Recreation Department has administered a Scholarship program since 1990 with our first CDBG awarded in 1993. This is an ongoing program each year, with the number of participants varying depending on the amount of money available to allocate. : Recreation and Natural Resource Department To: From: Date: Re: e mo r;� �' William W. Burns, City Manager � Jack Kirk, Director of Recreation and Natural Resources �� February 2, 2001 CDBG Senior Companion Program The City of Fridley and City of Coon Rapids Senior Programs have submitted a joint application to Anoka County for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding of the Senior Companion Program. The Senior Companion program provides for low income seniors to spend time with and assist other low income, isolated seniors. The companions make home visits, take them grocery shopping, go on outings, help with doctor appointments and provide moral support for their companions. Anoka County is requiring all applications to be for $5000 or more. In previous years, the annual Senior Companion CDBG requests from both the Cities of Fridley and Coon Rapids has been for less than $5000. It was recommended by Anoka County staff that the Cities considered a joint request for funding this year. The staff of the Senior Programs in Fridley and Coon Rapids has determined it to be in the best interest of both programs to submit the joint application and have asked for $11,433 in assistance. The CDBG funds are used to pay for the Senior Companion Coordinator in each community (Nancy Shaw in the Fridley Senior Program) and to cover out of pocket expenses of the companions while on duty. Such things as automobile mileage and meals are covered for the senior companions. The Fridley Senior Program would receive $6,422 of this requested grant. Attached is the completed application form as submitted to Anoka County. It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council of the City of Fridley support the submittal of this CDBG application and pass a motion in support of the application to Anoka County. � Ct1Y0E FRtDLEY FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CEIYTER • 6431 UNIVERSITY AVE. N.E. FRIDLEY, MN 55432 •(6l2) 571-3450 • FAX (6l2) 571-1287 January 18, 2001 Jennifer Bergman Anoka County Community Development Manager Government Center - 7`}' Floor 2100 3rd Ave Anoka, MN 55303 Dear Ms. Bergman: This letter is to inform you of the Fridley Senior Program's intent to apply for 2001-2002 Community Development Block Grant Funds. The grant will be used to support the Senior Companion Program for the communities of Coon Rapids and Fridley. We will be submitting a joint application with the City of Fridley as the fiscal agent and the City of Coon Rapids as a sub-contractor. The Fridley City Council will review the application at their February 5, 2001 council meeting for approval. The City of Coon Rapids Council will review the application at their February 6`h meetina. Council minutes will be forwarded to you for attachment to the application after these dates. � spectfully, r- _,�� Connie Thompson Jack Kirk Senior Pro�ram Coordinator Director, Recreation and Natural ReSOUrces :ct 30 JKO1-01 Anoka County Competitive Municipal CDBG Program FY 2001 Application for Assistance General Information Applicant Name: City of Fridley/Coon Rapids Senior Programs Address: 6085 7th Street NE Cifiy: Fridley State/Zip: Minnesota 55432 II. Project Information Contact Person Name and Titte: Nancy Shaw, Program Assistant Phone: (763)502-5151 Fax: (763) 502-5140 E-Mail: shawnCa�ci.fridley.mn.us Alternate Contact Person: Ann Kusie Phone: (763) 767-6521 Project Title: Fridley / Coon Rapids Senior Companions Project Description: A project providing a means for which seniors serve other low income, isolated seniors in the communities of Fridley and Coon Rapids. CDBG Funds Requested: $11,433.00 Total Cost of Project: $ 37,773.00 Project Location: Fridley Community Center Coon Rapids Senior Center Which Eligible Activity Will Your Project Meet: ❑ Acquisition ❑ Disposition ❑ Public Facilities and Improvements ❑ Clearance and Demolition ❑ Rehabilitation Activities ❑ Code Enforcement ❑ Historic Preservation ❑ Renovation of Closed Buildings ❑ Lead-Based Paint Testing and Abatement ❑ Activities Related to Economic Development ❑ Planning � Public Seniice 31 which Nationa� Ub�ective Wili Your Project Meet: ❑ Benefitting Low/Moderate Income: (if you check this box, you must check one below, answer following question only if the box is checked) ❑ Area Benefit A. In what Census Tract(s) and Block Group(s) is your project located (include maps)? B. How many residents live in this area? C. What is the percentage of low and moderate income beneficiaries? D. What Documentation did the Agency use? HUD Data Survey If a survey was used, please attach comp/eted survey � Limited Clientele (at least 51 % of the people served must be low to moderate income) A. How many people do you anticipate serving in the upcoming year`? 80 B. Of those people, how many will be served with CDBG funds? 60 C. Does this project benefit any specialized population such as: Disabled x _ Elderly Homeless Other ❑ Housing ❑ Economic Development (at least 51 % of the jobs must be made available to low to moderate income people and one job must be created for every $25,000 in funds ❑ Reduce or Eliminate Slum or Blight: (if you check this box, you must check one below) ❑ Area Basis (please include census track map or survey results) ❑ Spot Basis (please attach photos of the project) ❑ Urban Renewal (must be a HUD designated area) ❑ Urgent Need 32 III. Project Number of Individuals/Households to Benefit from Project: 80 Individuals 80 Households How Will Income Be Verified: How Many Low to Moderate Individuals/Households to Benefit: 80 Individuals 80 Households ❑ Income verification Request Forms � Presumed Benefit ❑ Census Track Data ❑ Survey ❑ Other, please explain 33 IV. Goals and Priorities A. Which Category Best Describes Your Project (Select from Housing or Community Development Goals and Priorities Charts attached): Senior Programs / Senior Services B. What Priority Was This Category Assigned? � High ❑ Medium ❑ Low C. Describe Why Your Project Fits Into This Category. Senior Companions serve isolated homebound elderly that do not have support of family or others in the community on a regular basis. Senior Companions visit low income seniors for 2-4 hours per week taking them out of their homes for a variety of activities including grocery shopping, lunch, or visits to the senior center. Many seniors visited have impaired vision so the senior companion assists them in paying bills, reading mail and reading prices while shopping. These seemingly small aids help make lives appear normal and more meaningful. Depression can be a major problem among isolated seniors. According to statistic from Pfizer Inc., in 1993, seniors comprised 12% of the American population but ranked 20% in suicide incidents. The isolated older adult finds hope when there is someone to count on to help with daily tasks that othenivise would appear oven�vhelming. An additional impact is the one for the sen�or companion themselves: Senior Companions are usually low-income seniors that receive a stipend for volunteering. The stipend makes volunteering affordable, gives meaning and purpose to the volunteer's free time as well as giving back to the community by caring for its homebound citizens. 34 IV. Project Budget Total Project Cost: $ 37,773.00 Acquisition/Rehabilitation Total CDBG Funds: $ 11.433.00 � Public Service % of CDBG Funds in Total Cost: 30% ❑ Plannin Source of Funds Amount Committed Pending Lutheran Social Services $ 23,024.00 In Kind � 3316.00 (City of Fridley / City of Coon Rapids) $ $ $ 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4 BR Maximum Rent - FMR Monthly Contract Rent Number of Units Size per sq. ft. Property Acquisition Costs Total CDBG Funds Requested Purchase Price: Closing Costs: Other Acquisition Costs: Subtotal: Construction Costs: (please note that Total CDBG Funds Ftequested CDBG funds cannot be used for new construction Site Improvements: Construction: Permits: Other Construction Costs: 35 Subtotal: Professional Fees or Personnel Costs Total CDBG Funds F�equested ArchitecUEngineer: Survey: Hazardous Material Survey: Appraisai: LegaL• Project Manager: Other Professional Fees: SubtotaL Other Development Costs: Total CDBG Funds Requested Relocation: Financing Costs: Environmental Review or Study: Other: Subtotal: TotaL• COMPLETE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE PROJECTS ONLY Personnel Total CDBG Funds Requested Salaries: 7468.00 3868.00 Fringe Benefits: 255.00 255.00 FICA: 293.00 293.00 Health Insurance: Worker's Compensation: 17.00 17.00 Unemployment: Other: 200.00 200.00 (Training) Subtotal: 8233.00 4633.00 Operations Total CDBG Rent: 2500.00 Equipment: 36 Insurance: Phone/Fax: 816.00 Postage: 50.00 50.00 Printing: 250.00 250.00 Supplies/Materials: 100.00 100.00 Travel and Expenses: 9600.00 6400.00" (mileage for transportation and meal allowance with ciients Contract Services: 16,224.00 Other: Subtotal: 29,540.00 6800.00 Total: 37,773:00 11,433.00 COMPLETE FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS ONLY Total CDBG Funds Requested Professional Services: Project Management: Other: Total: 37 V. Certi%ation I certify that the information contained in this application is true and correct and that it contains no misrepresentations, falsifications, intentional omissions, or conceafinent of material facts. I further certify that no contracts have been awarded, funds committed or construction begun on the proposed project, and that none will be prior to issuance of a Release of Funds by the proc�ram administrator. , � Signature of Authorized Official Constance D. Thompson Name of Authorized Official 1 /26/01 Date Senior Proc�ram Supervisor, Citv of Fridl�v Title �� • 1. What is the goal of this project? Senior Companions provide the services that frail elderly need to live independently. • To provide assistance and friendship to elderly adults who are homebound and, generally, living alone. • To assist with simple chores including transportation to medical appointments and shopping opportunities • To offer social contacts for the purpose of socialization • To provide respite care for short periods of time relieving caregivers. 2. Who will benefit from this project? Low income, isolated seniors in the cities of Fridley and Coon Rapids 3. Describe the applicant and the eztent and length of ezperience the applicant has in developing, managing, and/or administering similar activities. The Cities of Fridley and Coon Rapids have had volunteer stations through their senior programs since 1989. During this time, they have grown from three to nine companions. The Fridley Senior Program Supervisor has supervised the Fridley progrun staff during the entire 11 years and has over 20 years of experience with programs for older adults. The volunteer stations accept responsibility for assignment, training and supervision of Senior Companions. Because the starions are part of a federally funded nrogram (ACTIOI�, they mi�st comply with Corporation for Narional Service regulations and other laws, Executive Orders, and policies/regulations applicable to and conceming the program. Volunteer stations must provide a safe worldng environment for the Seniar Corps volunteers, including their client assignments. To reduce some of the administrative costs at the County level, Fridley and Coon Rapids are applying jointly for fimds. The City of Fridley will serve as the fiscal agent for both programs. Individual community statistics are available but for the purpose of this grant we have summuized the data. The Fridley and Coon Rapids Senior Programs, as well as the Cities' Financial staff, have had a good working relationship over the years and look forward to another opporlunity to combine their resources for the best possible service to our older adult population. A Memorandum of Understanding has been drafted and will be presented to the Councils in February. It is also our goal for the program to continue to inform policymakers of the needs of elders within our communities and give them the expertise they need in dealing with issues that concern older adults. �r� AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 CITY OF FRIDLE7 TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �/�� SUBJECT: CONTRACT WITH GOVERNMENT & ENTERPRISE SERVICES DATE: FEBRUARY 1, Z001 Staff is proposing to enter into a contract with Phil Cohen of Brooklyn Center and his associates for services that we hope will lead to funding of Highway 65 improvements between I-694 and 63rd Avenue. They will work with staff toward acquisition of federal and state funding as outlined on the attached work program. I recommend your approval of the contract. Attachments � 'i , , 0 i GOVERNMENT & ENTERPRISE SERVICES SS01 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, M1V. 55430 Phone: 763-560-9265 Fax: 763-560-9028 ******s*****s*******s******s****************s*******r******s*****�*sss*******•****s*�* WORK PLAN CITY OF FRIDLEY-TH 65 PROJECT JANUARY 23, 2001 Finalized- February 1. 2001 TO: MR.WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA: FROM: Phil Cohen, President Government & Enterprise Services JANUARY: . Meet with City of Fridley to review and approve work plan. Meet with Metro Co�ancil TAB & Transportation Staff Re: Transportation Policy Plan (TPP), Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Regional Solicitation Criteria and schedule and MnDOT Metro Area Transportation S�stem Plan (TSP). . Review with Fridley the status of the plans for the proposed improvement, estimated costs, agency reviews,etc. . Review with Fridley, the previous Regional Solicitation Grant application. . Review the Metro Council Review of the previous Fridley application. . Strong effort to influence criteria changes in the Smart Growth & Housing provisions. Setup up monthly meeting schedule to meet with the City of Fridley to report on progress to date. ( Special Meetings could be requested if the issues become time sensitive) Suggest meeting to be held either the last week of each month of the first week of the month). Next Meeting: Wednesday, February 7th, 2PM at Fridley. 41 GOYERNMENT & ENTERPRISE SERVICES SS01 Humboldt Avenue Nonh Brooklyn Center, MN. SS430 Phone: 763-560.9265 Far: 763-560-9028 City of Fridley-TH-65 Project Work Program January 23, 2001, Finalized February 1, 2001 - Page 2 FEBRUARY: . Review results of Fridley meeting w/MnDOT on project status and prioritization on February 2nd. . Determine central office rationale for not endorsing metro division recommendation and ways that approvals can be obtained. . Review with Metro Council Transportation and Planning Staff policies in the Regional Blueprint that may be applicable to this project. . Meet with the City of Fridley for progress report. MARCH: . Review with Metro Council TAB & Transportation Planning Staff Solicitation Grant Criteria that may be applicable to this project. . Draft possible comments to be submitted at the April l Oth Grant Solicitation Public Hearing. . Monitor State Transportation Legislative Initiatives relating to provide new money funding state highway projects that might be "ready to go". . Continue work with MnDOT and consultant staff. . Meet with City of Fridley for progress report APRIL: Attend April l Oth hearing and meet with staff at an early date to discuss any recommend changes in the criteria that we may offer. . Monitor April Meetings on the Grant Solicitation Criteria. . Monitor State Transportation Legislative Initiatives. Continue work with MnDOT and Consultant Staff Meet with City of Fridley for progress report. 42 GOVERNMENT & ENTERPRISE SERVICES SS01 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN. 55430 Phone: 763-560-9265 Fax: 763-560-9028 City of Fridley-TH-65 Project Work Program January 23, 2001 Finalized February 1, 2001 - Page 3. 1�� JUNE: . Monitor May meetings on the Grant Solicitation Criteria. Assist the Fridley consultant/staff in preparation of the Grant Application consistent with the Grant Solicitation Criteria that has been developed.. . Monitor State Transportation Initiatives. Meet with City of Fridley for progress report. . Attend with City of Fridley the scheduled June 6th TAB information meeting for Solicitation Applicants. . Continue work with Fridley consultant in finalizing the grant application. . Report on any State Legislative Highway Funding Initiatives. . Nieet with City of Fridley for progress report. JULY/AUGUST: Monitor all TAB meetings concerning the Grant Applications/eligibility,etc. Should grant application be successful, continue to monitor the progress through the committee's. Should the application not be successful, meet with staff and prepare to make presentation the August 16th meeting of the TAB-Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)- Funding & Programming Committee (F&P). . Meet with City of Fridley for progress report and a proposed Work Program for September through December, 2001. ( Note: This work program would include continue to monitor the grant application should it be successful through to March 2002. And, working with MnDOT should the 2001 legislature provide additional "One Time" funding for Highway Construction. 43 Government & Enterprise Services SS01 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN. 55430 Phone: 76.i-56U-9265 F�: 763-560-9028 ********************:**************************************************** January 22, 2001 Mr. William Burns, City Manager City of Fridtey 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432-4383 Dear Mr. Burns: Thank you for taking time to meet with us on January 4th and also for your phone call the following week indicating that the City Council was favorable to moving forward with a contract arrangement with Government & Enterprise Services (GES). As per our prior conversation, the following is submitted as a basic outline for the work that could be included in a contractual arrangement between the City and GES. Contract Objective The primary objective is to work with the Metropolitan Council, the Metropolitan Transportation Advisory Board and the Minnesota Department of Transportation in an effort to secure prioritization and funding for a third highway lane and related transportation facility improvements associated with TH 65 at the intersection of Medtronic Boulevard to Moore Lake Drive in Fridley. Terms and Conditions The agreement between the City and GES wouid be for a period of 12 months, commencing January 1, 2001 and ending December 31, 2001, unless both parties agree to extend the contract for additional time. The agreement would contain a standazd termination clause, without cause, that either party could exercise by giving the other 30 - termination written notice. All work completed prior to the actual terminate date would be compensated as per contract terms and conditions. Compensation The City shall pay GES the sum of Thirty-Six Thousand Dollars ($36.000.00) for work performed by making an initial payment of $6,000.00 (for the months of January and February) and monthly installment payments in the amount of $3,000.00 during each succeeding month through December 2001.Out-of-pocket expenses, not to exceed $100.00 per month shall also be paid by the City to GES for costs associated with travel, printing, postage, fax, and miscellaneous supplies, etc. GES shall submit periodic expense reports for reimbursement along with copies of receipts for all said expenses. No out-of-pocket expenses in excess of $10 0.00 per month shall be reimbursed without prior written approval from City. .. City of Fridley Page 2 Contract Mana e� ment Phil Cohen, President of GES will assume full responsibility for management of the contract between City and GES. GES reserves the right to assign work to various associates and sub-contractors that it deems qualified and needed to accomplish the primary objective of the Agreement. Associates and sub-contractors may include Capitol Connections, (Gary and Luci Botzek), Nancy Reeves and Associates and Community Resource Partnerships, Inc., Robert Benke, Principa(. Assignments would include Phil Cohen retaining direct liaison with MnDOT, Reeves with Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Advisory Board and its sub-committees, the Botzek's monitoring transportation financing legislation, and Robert Benke assuming special assignments as needed. Work Pro�ram GES proposes that it work with assigned City of Fridley staff to develop an agreed upon work plan and timetable keyed to achieve the City objective. Work has already commenced with the Metropolitan Council's TranspoRation Advisory Board and Council staff on Transportation Policy Planning and the Regional Solicitation for T-21 Funds- Grant Solicitation Criteria. The work program would include GES's review of the City of Fridley's grant solicitation that the city applied for during the last solicitation period, review the current status of the project design and any other work that has been done with various governmental agencies to date. Formal Contract If the above understanding sets for the basic objective and operating principals to your satisfaction please indicate your acceptance below and GES will prepare a formal contract for your consideration. Under the circumstances we hope that a final contract can be execute as soon as possible so that GES will be able to build on the momentum that it has developed. There also may be an opportunity to take advantage of various priority transportation projects that are in current funding cycles but that might not be built in a timely manner. GOVERNMENT & ENTERPRISE SERVICES �� hi hen , President Accept in Principle CITY OF FRIDLEY William Burns.City Manager Date Signed � 911�kcd ru �Z � Z o d/ . Date Signed 45 / � Q1Y OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 ! Appointment Starting Name Position Salarv Scott Acting Director of Hickok Community Dev. Exempt $72,349.20 per year .� Starting Date Jan. 10, 2001 Repiaces Barbara Dacy � : AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 CfTY OF FRIDLEY CLAIMS 978 � 7 - 98042 47 � �� i� AGENDAITEM City Council Meeting Of Monday, February 05, 2001 Ceneral Contractor-Commercial Kaas Dave Construction 6231 Sunrise Dr NE David Kaas Fridley MN 55432- Val-Pro Inc 1939 W Minnehaha Ave Mike Pawlyslyn St Paul MN 55104- General Contractor-Residential Amain Homes Inc (20131003) 7691 Central Ave NE Greg Comer Fridley MN 55432- Ask For Coveralls Remodel/Repair (20075564) 2499 Rice St #150 Joyce Camero Roseville MN 55113- Lamere Concrete & Masonry (3588) 714 181/2 St NE Minneapolis MN 55418- One Call Services Inc (20181592) 630 East Main St Anoka MN 55303- Sun Design (20225805) 1066 Circle Dr E Wayzata MN 55394- Dave Kraemer Jim Richardson Scott Schneider . � Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building Official State of MN State of MN State of MN State of M N State of MN Treichel Orville Construction (8019) 13819 Quinn St NW Orville Treichel State of MN Andover MN 55304- Sian Erector All Brite Sign 13325 Commerce Blvd STE 3 Kevin Gillette Ron Julkowski Rogers MN 55374- Building Official . • AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 C(lY OF FRIDLEY ESTIMATES Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. Holstad and Knaak, P.L.C. 1690 Minnesota World Trade Center 30 East Seventh Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Services Rendered as City Attorney for the Month of January, 2001 ............................................ 50 ......................................... $ 5,000.00 � AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 CffY OF fRIDLEY Date: 1/31/01 � To: William Burns, City Manager �� From: Scott Hickok, Acting Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planner RE: Public Hearing for an Ordinance creating the O-5 Overlay District For Those Lots Created Prior to 1955 '�� t7��i�1 INTRODUCTION City planning staff is proposing the creation of the "O-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS". This overlay district would apply to all residential lots created in the City of Fridley prior to December 29, 1955. The overlay district is a melding of the language currently found in the City's R-1 and Hyde Park zoning requirements. The overlay district will not enable property owners to subdivide existing lots into the smaller sizes allowed in the overlay district. The "O-5" district would reduce minimum lot size to 5,000 sq. ft., reduce the minimum lot width to 50', reduce the required rear yard setback for living area to 25', reduce the required rear yard setback for an attached garage to 15', require a minimum home size of 768 sq. ft., and increase the allowable lot coverage to 35% for those lots created prior to December 29, 1955. Making these changes may allow infill development in some of the older portions of Fridley and, most importantly, will remove the "non-conforming" status from a number of existing homes, leading to reinvestment in the City's existing housing stock. Property owners of "non-conforming" lots have previously not had any incentive to maintain or improve their housing stock, as they will lose the investment in the event of fire or natural disaster that damages the home beyond 40°/a of it's market value. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the January 17, 2001 Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held on the creation of the O-5 overlay district. After review of the proposed overlay district requirements, a motion was made to recommend approval of the creation of the O-5 overlay district. The motion carried unanimously. 51 : AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 CffY OF FRIDLEY Date: 1 /31 /01 To: City of Fridley Council Members From: Paui Bolin, Planner RE: Background Information on Draft Ordinance Creating An Overlay District For Those Lots Outside of Hyde Park Created Prior to December 9, 1955. INTRODUCTION Lacking large tracts of undeveloped land, it is imperative that the City of Fridley explore ways to preserve and enhance existing housing stock while providing opportunities for infill development. Preliminary data obtained by planning staff indicates that there are 204 lots between 5,000 sq. ft. and 7,499 sq. ft. in size outside the HYDE PARK ADDITION, both developed and vacant, which under current zoning requirements are considered non- conforming. Staff has investigated different ways to allow in-fill development on these vacant parcels and re-investment in the homes already located on these non-conforming lots. The purpose of this memo is to provide the rationale for recommending an Ordinance revision (a melding of R-1 & Hyde Park requirements) to permit expansion and new construction on lots, platted prior to December 29, 1955, between 5,000 and 7,499 square feet. BACKGROUND Prior to the incorporation of Fridley, the residential areas were platted and otherwise subdivided with lots of varying sizes, some as small as 25" X 110" (2,750 sq. ft.). Since December 29, 1955 the R-1 Single Family section of the zoning code has required that all single family lots created have a minimum lot area of 9,000 sq. ft. and a minimum lot width of 75'. The R-1 Section of the zoning code requires a minimum lot area of 7,500 sq. ft. for those lots created prior to December 29, 1955. Past concerns with substandard lot sizes in the HYDE PARK ADDITION led to the creation of the "S-1 HYDE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT REGULATIONS" special zoning district in 1976. This special district, developed by a neighborhood task force, retained the 7,500 sq. ft. minimum lot size, but reduced the minimum lot width to 60'. Due to the heavy citizen involvement in the creation of the HYDE PARK special district, staff is not recommending the inclusion of the HYDE PARK ADDITION in the proposed overlay district. 52 Of the approximate 204 lots befinreen 5,000 sq. ft. and 7,499 sq. ft. in size outside the HYDE PARK ADDITION, both developed and vacant, approximately 110 of them are located in RIVERVIEW HEIGHTS and 10 are located in the PLYMOUTH ADDITION. Staff is working with the GIS Department to further narrow down the exact number of properties, both vacant and developed meeting the criteria to be included in the overlay district. A draft of this map will be available for your viewing at Wednesday's meeting. COUNCIL / COMMISSION SURVEY RESULTS This past years Council / Commission survey asked whether or not the City should create special zoning districts for areas of the City where there are high concentrations of non- conforming single family lots. Two of the Council members were in favor of allowing lots of 50' in width and 5,000 square feet in size. One Council member would choose to align lot width and area requirements with existing conditions, one member chose to leave the requirements as they are, and one Council member did not know. Of the 41 Commission responses, seven of them would make no changes to the existing requirements. Thirty three of the Commissioners would make some kind of change and 1 didn't know. Of the 33 who would make changes, 19 of the Commissioners would support lot sizes of at least 5,000 square feet in size and the other 11 respondents would align lot width and area requirements with existing circumstances. PROPOSED OVERLAY DISTRICT City planning staff is proposing the creation of the "O-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS". This overlay district would apply to all residential lots created in ±he City of Fridley prior to December 29, � 955. The overlay district is a melding of the language currently found in the City's R-1 and Hyde Park zoning requirements. The overlay district will not enable property owners to subdivide existing lots into the smaller sizes allowed in the overlay district. The "O-5" district would reduce minimum lot size to 5,000 sq. ft., reduce the minimum lot width to 50', reduce the required rear yard setback for living area to 25', reduce the required rear yard setback for an attached garage to 15', require a minimum home size of 768 sq. ft., and increase the allowable lot coverage to 35% for those lots created prior to December 29, 1955. Making these changes will allow infill development in some of the older portions of Fridley and remove the "non-conforming" status from a number of existing homes, leading to reinvestment in our existing housing stock. Property owners on "non- conforming" lots do not have any incentive to maintain or improve their housing stock, as they will lose the investment in the event of fire or natural disaster that damages the home beyond 40% of iYs market value. Lot size does not dictate home value. To give you some idea of what kind of a home could be built on a 5,000 sq. ft. lot with 35% lot coverage and a 15' rear yard setback please refer to the site plan below. It should be noted that the construction cost of this home (based on $115/sq. ft.} is $119,600. The construction cost of the garage is approximately an additional $12,000 for a total construction cost of $131,600. It should be noted that 53 these construction costs only include materials and labor and are not reflective of the actual selling price for these homes. One item not included, which would raise ttie actual selling price for new homes, is the actual selling price of the lot. In reviewing assessed values and some comparable lot sales, it is estimated that these lots may sell anywhere between $8,000 and $20,000+ depending on size and location. � � � � Sample Site Plan For 5,000 sq. ft. lot. WHAT YOU MAY HEAR FROM OPPONENTS 8� STAFF RESPONSES 1. 20 to 30 years from now, new houses on the lots are going to look "run down" just like some of the existing homes in these neighborhoods. • The housing market is completely different today than 40-80 years ago when many of the smaller houses in these areas were built as "cottages". • Construction of a new home is very expensive, and that represents an "investment" that the owner is going to maintain...$'125,000 to $160,000 is a lot of money, and a significant part of one's life earnings would be made to _ maintaining that. • By making smaller lot sizes conforming, people will reinvest in their existing homes and we will not have as many "run down" homes in these areas. 2. Suburbs are supposed to have space! They will be right on top of the house next door! • The City has seen one story ramblers on 75 foot wide lots get wider every yearwith two and three car garages...some garages are as close as 1Q feet (garage to garage), and some with variances even closer. From a streetscape point of view, its not a problem. The city has to adapt to changes in the culture. • Though the lot sizes may be smaller, the same side yard setbacks will still apply, so the homes will not be closer to neighboring homes than in any other portion of the City. 54 3. These lots have no depth, how can you get a reasonable house and garage on there? • We have examined various site plans, including some in the City's remodeling handbook, which show that it is very practical to place a reasonabfe size home and garage on these lots. The site plan included in this memo is just one example. • St. Louis Park and Richfield have been permitting the same thing on smaller width lots...their programs have been very successful. BENEFITS OF APPROVING OVERLAY DISTRICT Why should the City of Fridley approve this overlay district, reducing the minimum lot size of these lots which were created prior to December 29, 1955? The most obvious reasons are to spur reinvestment in the existing housing stock and to provide additional opportunities for new homes in Fridley. The following list summarizes the benefits of creating this overlay district. • Provide housing options & choices. Lacking the large tracts of undeveloped land found in outer suburbs, Fridley must look at infill development to provide additional housing opportunities. This overlay district would create additional opportunities for new construction. • Homes on non-conforming lots become a"lost investmenY'. Owners will not invest in a home on a non-conforming lot due to the fear of losing the investment in the event the home becomes more than 40% destroyed in fire or natural disaster. � Gives City, HRA, & residents more flexibility in developing and rehabilitating housing. Allowing construction on these lots will enable the HRA more opportunities to purchase additional lots and develop more single family homes. Removing the "non-conforming" status from existing homes will allow more residents to participate in City/HRA housing rehabilitation programs. • Does not increase density. These are lots of record created prior to December 29, 1955. Sideyard setbacks will remain the same. The wording in the overlay district does not allow property owners to now create smaller lots. • Tax forfeiture of "substandard lots" has a cost for neighborhood and City. Unbuildable lots that end up "tax forfeit" do not generate taxes for the City, County, or School district. These properties end up costing the Fridley tax payers money as they become a habitual maintenance problem. • Lot width does not dictate home value. The square footage of the home, the design, materials, and labor put into the home determine home value. The trend across the nation has been to build larger homes on smaller lots. 55 Memorandum PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing for the creation of the overlay district, titled, "O-5 REStDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 REGULATIONS". 12/22/98 Cyl�� ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE RECODIFING FRIDLEY CITY CODE., CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED "ZONING" BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 205.XX, 0-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 DISTRICT REGULATIONS THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE DOES ORDAIN THAT: SECTION l. THAT CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE BE HEREBY AMENDED TO CREATE A NEW DISTRICT SECTION 205.XX TO BE ENTITLED NUMBERED A1�1D READ AS FOLLOWS: 205.XX O-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 DISTRICT REGULATIONS 1. TITLE This Section shall be referred to as the "Pre-1955 Lots" in short form. 2. PURPOSE The purpose of this special zoning district is to: A. Change the present "legal, nonconfomung use" status of the residential dwellings located in this district on lots over 5,000 square feet in size to a"conforming use" status. B. Re-establish and maintain the residenrial character of Fridley's neighborhoods. C. Protect the property rights of all present landowners as much as possible, while promoting reinvestment and infill development in Fridley neighborhoods. D. Establish a zoning mechanism for the City that will encourage residential investment and development on those lots created and recorded at Anoka County prior to December 29, 1955. 3. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES The extent of this zoning overlay district shall only be comprised of those residentially zoned lots split, platted, or otherwise created and recorded at Anoka County prior to December 29, 1955. The O-5 district includes lots meeting all criteria set forth in this chapter, located in the following Plats created and recorded prior to December 29, 1955: Adams Street Addition; Auditor's Subdivisions #22, #23, #25, #39, #59, #77, #78, #79, #88, #89, #92, #94, #94 Sublot 10, #108, #129, #153, & #155; Berlin Addition; Brookview Addition; Brookview �'d Addition; Camp Howard and Hush's 15` Addition to Fridley Park; Carlson's Suminit Manor North Addition; Carlson's Summit Manor South Addition; Central Avenue Addition; Central View Manor; City View; Clover Leaf Addition; Clover Leaf �`d Addition; Dennis Addition; Donnay's Lakeview Manor; Elwell's Riverside Heights; Elwell's Riverside Heights Plat 2; Florence Park Addition to Fridley; Fridley Park; Hamilton's Addition to Mechanicsville; Hayes River Lots; Horizon Heights; Itvington Addition to Fridley Park; Lowell Addition to Fridley 57 Ordinance # Page z Park; Lucia Lane Addition; Lund Addition; Meloland Gardens; Moore Lake Addition; Moore Lake Highlands & Additions 1-4; Moore Lake Hills; Moore Lake Park Addition; Moore Lake Park �'d Addition; Murdix Park; Niemann Addirion; Norwood Addition to Fridley Park; Oak Creek Addition; Oak Creek Addition Plat 2; Oak Grove Addition to Fridley Park; Oakhill Addition; Onaway; Osborne Manor; Ostmans 1S` Addition; Ostamans 2"d Addition; Parkview Manor; Plymouth; Rearrangement of Blocks 13, 14, 15 Plymouth; Rearrangement of Lots 1,2,3, Blk 1 and Lots 1,2,3, Blk 4 Rice Creek Temace Plat 2; Rees Addition to Fridley Park; Revised Auditors Subdivisions #10, #23, #77, #103; Rice Creek Terrace Plats 1-4; Riverview Heights; Sandhurst Addirion; Second Revised Auditors Subdivision #21; Scherer Addirion; Shaffer's Subdivsion #1; Shorewood; Springbrook Park; Spring Lake Park Lakeside; Spring Valley; Subdivsion of Lot 10, Auditors Subdivision #94; Sylvan Hills; Sylvan Hills Plat 2& 3; Vineland Addition to Fridley Park; and any unplatted lots created, prior to December 29, 1955, as recorded at Anoka County. Any lot combinations or divisions completed and recorded after December 29, 1955 are excluded from this overlay district. 4. USES PERMITTED A. Principal Uses. The following are principal uses in the O-5 Dishict: One-family dwellings. B. Accessory Uses. (1) Only one (1) accessory building in excess of 240 square feet is allowed per site. One (1) additional accessory building is allowed provided it does not exceed 240 square feet. (2) Any accessory building in excess of the above requirements (square footage or number of buildings) requires a Special Use Permit. (3) All accessory buildings must be permanently attached to a foundarion and may not be used for home occupations. (4) All garages whether attached to, tucked under or detached from the main dwelling are considered to be an accessory building. The following are accessory uses in the O-5 District: (a) A private garage is the first accessory building. It shall not exceed 100% of the first floor area of the dwelling unit or a maximum of 1,000 square feet. (b) Privately owned recreational facilities which are for the enjoyment and convenience of the residents of the principal use and their guests. (c) Home occupations. (d) The rental of rooms for occupancy to not more than two (2) persons per dwelling unit. C. Existing Uses. : Ordinance # Page a (1) Existing one (1) family dwellings that do not confoim to the conditions of this Chapter will be allowed to continue as a pernutted use. In the event that the main structure is either damaged or destroyed, the e�cisting use will be allowed to rebuild to the setbacks of the existing building or to the allowed setbacks of the district. Alterations and additions will be allowed when they improve the structure, provided they meet the required setbacks as stated in this Chapter. D. Uses Excluded. The following are excluded uses in the O-5 District: (1) Radio or television antennas exceeding a height of twenry (20) feet above the dwelling roof. (2) Any use not specifically permitted in the preceding paragraphs of this Section. 5. LOT REQUIREMENTS AND SETBACKS A. Lot Area. A lot area of not less than 5,000 square feet is required. B. Lot Width. (1) The width of a lot shall not be less than fifly (50) feet at the required setback. Corner lots shall not be less than sixty-five (65) feet at the required setback. C. Lot Coverage: Not more than tlurty-five percent (35%) of the area of a lot shall be covered by buildings. D. Setbacks: (1) Front Yard: A front yard with a depth of not less than twenty-five (25) feet is required. (2) Side Yard: Two (2) side yards are required, each with a width of not less than ten (10) feet, except as follows: (a) Where a house is built without an attached garage, a minimum side yard requirement shall be ten (10) feet on one side, and thirteen (13) feet on the other side, so that there is access to the rear yard for a detached garage and off-street parking area. (b) Where a house is built with an attached garage, the side yard adjoining the attached garage or accessory building may be reduced to not less than five (5) feet, provided the height of the garage or accessory building on that side is not more than fifteen (15) feet. �. � Ordinance # (3) Comer Lots: Page 4 (a) The side yard width on a street side of a comer lot shall be not less than seventeen and one-half (17.5) feet. (b) Any attached or unattached accessory building that opens on the side street, shall be at least twenty-five (25) feet from the property line on a side street. (4) Rear Yard: (a) A rear yard with a depth of not less than twenty-five (25) feet pemutted for living area, however, setback may be reduced to 15' for an attached garage located in rear of lot. (b) Detached accessory buildings may be built not less than three (3) feet from any lot line in the rear yard not adjacent to a street. 6. BUILDING REQUIREMENTS A. Height. No building shall hereafter be erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, enlarged or moved, so as to exceed the building height limit of thirty (30) feet. B. Minimum Floor Area. A one-�amily dwelling unit shall have a minimum first floor area of 768 square feet of living space. C. Basement All one family dwellings constructed on vacant lots, as of January 1, 1983 shall have a basement except if located in a flood plain area. 7. PERFORIVIANCE STANDARDS: A. Parking Requirements. (1) At least two (2) off-street parking stalls shall be provided for each dwelling unit. (2) No parking stall shall be located in any portion of the front yard, except on a driveway or hardsurfaced parking space, approved by the City, and set back a minimum of three (3) feet from the side property line, except as agreed to in writing by adjacent property owners and filed with the City. (3) A garage shall sa.tisfy the off-street parking stall requirement. (4) All driveways and parking stalls shall be surfaced with blacktop, concrete or other hard � surface material approved by the Ciry. B. Garage Requirements .1 Ordinance # Page 5 All lots on which a new home is constructed, as of March 1, 2001, shall have at minimum a single car garage. C. Exterior Storage. (1) Nothing shall be stored in the required front yard. (2) All materials shall be kept in a building or shall be fully screened, so as not to be visible from any public right-of-way except for stacked firewood, boats and trailers placed in the side yard. D. Refuse. All waste materials, refuse or garbage shall be contained in closed containers as required under the Chapter entitled "Waste Disposal" of the Fridley City Code. E. Drainage And Grade Requirements. A finished ground grade shall be established such that natural drainage away from all buildings is provided. The following minimum criteria shall apply: (1) The minimum elevation of finished grade shall not be less than one fourth (1/4) inch rise per horizontal foot oi setback measured from curb grade. (2) The City may specify a minimum finished ground grade for any structures in order to allow proper drainage and connection to City utilities. E. Landscaping. The following shall be minimum criteria for landscaping: (1) Sodding and landscaping shall extend across the entire front yard and side yards including the boulevard. - - (2) All other open areas of any site, except for areas used for parking, driveways or storage, shall be sodded, seeded or have vegetative cover. (3) All uses shall provide water facilities to yard areas for maintenance of landscaping. (4) It shall be the owner's responsibility to see that all required landscaping is maintained in an attractive, well kept condirion. (5) All vacant lots, tracts or parcels shall be properly maintained in an orderly manner free of litter and junk. F. Maintenance. It shall be the responsibility of the properry owner to ensure that: 61 Ordinance # Page 6 (1) Every exterior wall, foundation and roof of any building or structure shall be reasonably watertight, weather tight and rodent proof and shall be kept in a good state of maintenance and repair. Exterior walls shall be maintained free from extensive dilapidation due to cracks, tears or breaks of deteriorated plaster, stucco, brick, wood or other material that gives evidence of long neglect. (2) The protective surface on exterior walls of a building shall be maintained in good repair and provide a sufficient covering and protection of the structural surface against its deterioration. Without limiting the generality of this Section, a protective surface of a building shall be deemed to be out of repair if: (a) More than twenty-five percent (25%) of the azea of any plane or wall on which the protective surface is paint is blistered, cracked, flaked, scaled or chalked away, or (b) More than twenty-five percent (25%) of the pointing of any brick or stone wall is loose or has fallen out. (3) Every yard and all structures, walls, fences, walks, steps, driveways, landscaping and other exterior developments shall be maintained in an attractive, well kept condition. (4) The boulevard area of a premises shall be properly maintained, groomed and cared for by the abutting property owner. G. Essential Services. (1) Connection is required on each lot served by Ciry sanitary sewer. (2) Connection is required on each lot served by a City water line. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 5`'' DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2001. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK Public Hearing: First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: February 5, 2001 February 5, 2001 February 26, 2001 March 8, 2001 62 SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR f AGENDA ITEM ` CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 CRY OF FRIDLEY Date:1 /31 /01 � To: William Burns, City Manager � From: Scott Hickok, Acting Community Development Director Paui Bolin, Planner RE: First reading of an Ordinance creating the O-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 REGULATIONS �i � . INTRODUCTION City planning staff is proposing the creation of the "0-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS". This overlay district would apply to �II residential lots created in the City of Fridley prior to Deeember 29, 1955. The overlay district is a melding of the language currently found in the City's R-1 and Hyde Park zoning requirements. Creation of the O-5 District will remove the "non-conforming" status from a number of existing homes, leading to reinvestment in the City's existing housing stock. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the January 17, 2001 Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held on the creation of the O-5 overlay district. After review of the proposed overlay district requirements, a motion was made to recommend approval of the creation of the O-5 overlay district. The motion carried unanimously. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends that the City Council hold the first reading for the creation of the overlay district, titled, "O-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 REGULATIONS". �� ORDINANCE AN ORDINANCE RECODIFING FRIDLEY CITY CODE., CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED "ZONING" BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 205.XX, 0-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 DISTRICT REGULATIONS THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE DOES ORDAIN THAT: SECTION 1. THAT CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE BE HEREBY AMENDED TO CREATE A NEW DISTRICT SECTION 205.XX TO BE ENTITLED NUMBERED AND READ AS FOLLOWS: 205.XX O-5 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 DISTRICT REGULATIONS 1. TITLE This Section shall be referred to as the "Pre-1955 Lots" in short form. 2. PURPOSE The purpose of this special zoning district is to: A. Change the present "legal, nonconforming use" status of the residential dwellings located in this district on loEs over 5,000 sqiaare feet in size to a"confomiing use" status. B. Re-establish and maintain the residenrial character of Fridley's neighborhoods. C. Protect the property rights of all present landowners as much as possible, while promoting reinvestment and infill development in Fridley neighborhoods. D. Establish a zoning mechanism for the City that will encourage residential investment and development on those lots created and recorded at Anoka County prior to December 29, 1955. 3. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES The extent of this zoning overlay district shall only be comprised of those residentially zoned lots split, platted, or otherwise created and recorded at Anoka County prior to December 29, 1955. The O-5 district includes lots meeting all criteria set forth in this chapter, located in the following Plats created and recorded prior to December 29, 1955: Adams Street Addition; Auditor's Subdivisions #22, #23, #25, #39, #59, #77, #78, #79, #88, #89, #92, #94, #94 Sublot 10, #108, #129, #153, & #155; Berlin Addition; Brookview Addition; Brookview 2"d Addition; Camp Howard and Hush's ls` Addition to Fridley Park; Carlson's Summit Manar North Addition; Carlson's Summit Manor South Addition; Central Avenue Addition; Central View Manor; Ciry View; Clover Leaf Addition; Clover Leaf �'d Addition; Dennis Addirion; Donnay's Lakeview Manor; Elwell's Riverside Heights; Elwell's Riverside Heights Plat 2; Florence Park Addition to Fridley; Fridley Park; Hamilton's Addition to Mechanicsville; Hayes River Lots; Horizon Heights; Irvington Addition to Fridley Park; Lowell Addition to Fridley •' Ordinance # Page a Park; Lucia Lane Addition; Lund Addition; Meloland Gardens; Moore Lake Addition; Moore Lake Highlands & Additions 1-4; Moore Lake Hills; Moore La1ce Park Addition; Moore Lake Park �`d Addition; Murdix Park; Niemann Addition; Nonvood Addition to Fridley Park; Oak Creek Addition; Oak Creek Addition Plat 2; Oak Grove Addition to Fridley Park; Oakhill Addition; Onaway; Osborne Manar; Ostmans 15` Addition; Ostamans 2"d Addition; Parkview Manor; Plymouth; Rearrangement of Blocks 13, 14, 15 Plymouth; Rearrangement of Lots 1,2,3, Blk 1 and Lots 1,2,3, Blk 4 Rice Creek Terrace Plat 2; Rees Addition to Fridley Park; Revised Auditors Subdivisions #10, #23, #77, #103; Rice Creek Terrace Plats 1-4; Riverview Heights; Sandhurst Addirion; Second Revised Auditors Subdivision #21; Scherer Addition; Shaffer's Subdivsion #1; Shorewood; Springbrook Park; Spring Lake Park Lakeside; Spring Valley; Subdivsion of Lot 10, Auditors Subdivision #94; Sylvan Hills; Sylvan Hills Plat 2& 3; Vineland Addition to Fridley Park; and any unplatted lots created, prior to December 29, 1955, as recorded at Anoka County. Any lot combinations or divisions completed and recorded after December 29, 1955 are excluded from this overlay district. 4. USES PERMITTED A. Principal Uses. The following are principal uses in the O-5 District: One-family dwellings. B. Accessory Uses. (1) Only one (1) accessory building in excess of 240 square feet is allowed per site. One (1) additional accessory building is allowed provided it does not exceed 240 square feet. (2) Any accessory building in excess of the above requirements (square footage or number of buildings) requires a Special Use Permit. (3) All accessory buildings must be permanently attached to a foundation and may not be used for home occupations. (4) All garages whether attached to, tucked under or detached from the main dwelling are considered to be an accessory building. The following are accessory uses in the O-5 District: (a) A private garage is the first accessory building. It shall not exceed 100% of the first floor area of the dwelling unit or a maximum of 1,000 square feet. (b) Privately owned recreational facilities which are for the enjoyment and convenience of the residents of the principal use and their guests. (c) Home occupations. (d) The rental of rooms for occupancy to not more than two (2) persons per dwelling unit. C. Existing Uses. � Ordinance # Page 3 (1) Existing one (1) family dwellings that do not conform to the conditions of this Chapter will + be allowed to continue as a permitted use. In the event that the main structure is either damaged or destroyed, the existing use will be allowed to rebuild to the setbacks of the _ existing building or to the allowed setbacks of the district. Alterations and additions will be allowed when they improve the structure, provided they meet the required setbacks as stated in this Chapter. D. Uses Excluded. The following are excluded uses in the O-5 District: (1) Radio or television antennas exceeding a height of twenty (20) feet above the dwelling roof. (2) Any use not specifically pemutted in the preceding paragraphs of this Section. 5. LOT REQUIREMENTS AND SETBACKS A. Lot Area. A lot area of not less than 5,000 square feet is required. B. Lot Width. (1) The width of a lot shall not be less than fifly (50) feet at the required setback. Corner lots shall not be less than sixty-five (65) feet at the required setback. C. Lot Coverage: Not more than thirty-five percent (35%) of the area of a lot shall be covered by buildings. D. Setbacks: (1) Front Yard: A front yard with a depth of not less than twenty-five (25) feet is required. (2) Side Yard: Two (2) side yards are required, each with a width of not less than ten (10) feet, except as follows: (a) Where a house is built without an attached garage, a muiimum side yard requirement � shall be ten (10) feet on one side, and thirteen (13) feet on the other side, so that there is access to the rear yard for a detached garage and off-street parking area. • (b) Where a house is built with an attached garage, the side yard adjoining the attached garage or accessory building may be reduced to not less than five (5) feet, provided the height of the garage or accessory building on that side is not more than fifteen (15) feet. . . Ordinance # • (3) Corner Lots: Page 4 � (a) The side yard width on a street side of a corner lot shall be not less than seventeen and one-half (17.5) feet. (b) Any attached or unattached accessory building that opens on the side street, shall be at least twenty-five (25) feet from the property line on a side street. (4) Rear Yard: (a) A rear yard with a depth of not less than twenty-five (25) feet permitted for living area, however, setback may be reduced to 15' for an attached garage located in rear of lot. (b) Detached accessory buildings may be built not less than three (3) feet from any lot line in the rear yard not adjacent to a street. 6. BUILDING REQUIREMENTS A. Height. No building shall hereafter be erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, enlarged or moved, so as to exceed the building height limit of thirty (30) feet. B. Minimum Floor Area. A one-family dwelling unit shall have a minimum first floor area of 768 square feet of living space. C. Basement All one family dwellings constructed on vacant lots, as of January 1, 1983 shall have a basement except if located in a flood plain area. 7. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: A. Parking Requirements. (1) At least two (2) off-street parking stalls shall be provided for each dwelling unit. (2) No parking stall shall be located in any portion of the front yard, except on a driveway or hardsurfaced parking space, approved by the City, and set back a minimum of three (3) feet from the side property line, except as agreed to in writing by adjacent property owners and filed with the City. (3) A garage shall satisfy the off-street parking stall requirement. • (4) All driveways and parking stalls shall be surfaced with blacktop, concrete or other hard surface material approved by the City. B. Garage Requirements 67 Ordinance # Page s All lots on which a new home is constructed, as of Mazch 1, 2001, shall have at minimum a single car garage. C. Exterior Storage. (1) Nothing shall be stared in the required front yard. (2) All materials sha11 be kept in a building or shall be fully screened, so as not to be visible from any public right-of-way except for stacked firewood, boats and trailers placed in the side yard. D. Refuse. All waste materials, refuse or gazbage shall be contained in closed containers as required under the Chapter entitled "Waste Disposal" of the Fridley City Code. E. Drainage And Grade Requirements. A finished ground grade shall be established such that natural drainage away from all buildings is provided. The following minunum criteria shall apply: (1) The minunum elevarion of fuushed grade shall not be less than one fourth (1/4) inch rise per horizontal foot of setback measured from curb grade. (2) The City may specify a minunum finished ground grade for any structures in order to allow proper drainage and connection to City utilities. E. Landscaping. The following shall be minunum criteria for landscaping: (1) Sodding and landscaping shall extend across the entire front yard and side yards including - the boulevard. (2) All other open areas of any site, except for areas used for parking, driveways or storage, shall be sodded, seeded or have vegetative cover. (3) All uses shall provide water faciliries to yard areas for maintenance of landscaping. (4) It shall be the owne�'s responsibility to see that all required landscaping is maintained in an amactive, well kept condition. (5) All vacant lots, tracts or parcels shall be properly maintained in an orderly manner free of litter and junk. F. Maintenance. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to ensure that: . : Ordinance #. Page 6 (1) Every exterior wall, foundation and roof of any building or stiucture shall be reasonably watertight, weather tight and rodent proof and shall be kept in a good state of maintenance and repair. Exterior walls sha11 be maintained free from extensive dilapidation due to cracks, teazs or breaks of deteriorated plaster, stucco, brick, wood or other material that gives evidence of long neglect. (2) The protective surface on exteriar walls of a building shall be maintained in good repair and provide a sufficient covering and protection of the structural surface against its deterioration. Without limiting the generality of this Section, a protective surface of a building shall be deemed to be out of repair if (a) More than twenry-five percent (25%) of the area of any plane or wall on which the protective surface is paint is blistered, cracked, flaked, scaled or chalked away, or (b) More than twenty-five percent (25%) of the pointing of any brick or stone wall is loose or has fallen out. (3) Every yard and all structures, walls, fences, walks, steps, driveways, landscaping and other exterior developments shall be maintained in an attractive, well kept condition. (4) The boulevard area of a premises shall be properly maintained, groomed and cared for by the abutting property owner. G. Essential Services. (1) Connection is required on each lot served by City sanitary sewer. (2) Connection is required on each lot served by a City water line. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 5`h DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2001. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK Public Hearing: First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: February 5, 2001 February 5, 2001 February 26, 2001 March 8, 2001 .• SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR � � CfTY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 To: William W. Burns, City Manager /�,,� �' �II From: Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk Date: February 1, 2001 Re: Scheduling of Public Hearing of Proposed Charter Amendment on Chapter 7 of the Fridley Charter Pertaining to Taxation and Finances On November 7, 2000 the voters enacted a charter amendment pertaining to Chapter 7, Taxation and Finances. After passage of the amendment, those charged in implementing the amendment concluded the language was difficult to understand and could create problems for the city in the future. In an attempt to remedy potential difficulties, an Ad Hoc Work Group (Committee) was formed consisting of former Mayor Nancy Jorgenson, Finance Director Rick Pribyl, City Attorney Fritz Knaak, members of the Charter Commission and Charter Amendment Petition Committee. This Committee met four times and proposed an ordinance amending the charter to clarify the language of the voter approved amendment. The Charter Commission met on January 29th to discuss the work of the Committee and the proposed ordinance. The Charter Commission voted unanimously to forward the proposed clarifying amendment in ordinance format to the City Council, based on the concurrence of the Charter Commission attorney, to schedule the public hearing and to recommend adoption of the ordinance, as shown in the meeting minutes, Attachment 1. A letter was drafted to the Charter Commission attorney requesting her review and concurrence of the proposed ordinance. A letter was received on January 30, 2001 from Charter Commission Attorney Elizabeth Moore, as shown in Attachment 2. After reviewing and discussing the documents with the City Attorney and City Clerk, she has concurred with the Charter Commission's motion to approve the proposed language as it forwards the electorate's goals without compromising the city's ability to conduct business. Staff recommends the City Council schedule a public hearing on March 5, 2001, on the proposed ordinance as shown in Attachment 3. Q�� , CITY OF FRIDLEY CHARTER COI�IlVIISSION MEETING January 29, 2001 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Warren called the Charter Commission meeting to order at 7:20 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: VanDan Members Absent: Cindy Soule Attachment 1 Suzanne Warren, Craig Gordon, Bill Holm, Maynard Nielsen, Francis Don Findell, Char Fitzpatrick, Deborah Monden, Regina Querimit, Others Present: Deb Skogen, City Clerk/Staff Liaison Nancy Jorgenson, Fritz Knaak, Rick Pribyl, Gregg Pettersen, Lana Freeburg, Quentin Freeburg, Pete Eisensimmer APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 27, 2000, CHARTER COMMISSION MINUTES: MOTION by Commissioner Gordon seconded by Commissioner Nielsen to approve the November 27, 2000, Charter Commission Minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON WARREN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNAi�IIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION by Commissioner Gordon seconded by Commissioner Holm to approve the agenda. Chairperson Warren requested that the Administrative Matters be placed at the end of the agenda to allow discussion of the proposed ordinarice which would clarify the language of the voter approved amendment to Chapter 7 of the Charter. Commissioner Gordon accepted the request and UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON WARREN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIl�IOUSLY. 1. DISCUSSION OF CHARTER AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 7 Nancy Jorgen said that after discussing an issue on special assessments with a resident and discussion with the city council and city attorney it appeared there may be problems in how the voter approved amendment dealt with fees. Upon reviewing the State Statutes and City Charter there appeared to be no definition on discretionary fees. She discussed the matter with Gregg DRAFT 71 CHARTER COMNIISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 29, 2001 PAGE 3 Pettersen after the election and suggested it might be a good idea to put a group together to work to clarify the voter approved amendment. A group was put together representative of petition circulators, charter commission members, the city attorney and the city finance director. Ms. � Jorgenson said after four meetings the Ad Hoc Work Group came up with language everyone was comfortable with. The petition circulators met with their committee to see if there were any other concems and the issue was sent to the Charter Commission for their review in the hopes ` that it would be forwarded to the City Council for adoption. She described how one resident didn't feel they should pay for a special assessment because they do not want a concrete curb and gutter and that it may be such that he may decided to take the city to court to resolve the matter. The mission of the Ad Hoc Work Group was to find a way for the city to operate as efficiently and effectively as it could. Chairperson Warren asked how Ms. Jorgenson would summarize the four meetings. Ms Jorgenson said the meetings were very positive. She said the group developed a trust level where no one was right and no one was wrong and worked together to develop the proposed language in the best interest of the city. She thought most everyone that participated was comfortable with the proposed language clarifications and that the group worked very well. Gregg Pettersen said a group of people who circulated the petition and who voted yes on the amendment met on Saturday to discuss the proposed charter amendment. He said most everyone was comfortable with the proposed language, a few were still concerned that there be no loop holes in the language. He felt they had done the best job they could and there comes a time when you have to trust your elected officials to do the right things. Commissioner Van Dan expressed the concern as to how much autonomy the HRA had and whether or not the city had authority over them. Commissioner Van Dan had spoken with Larry Commers who felt the HRA was autonomous from the city and could market their own bonds if necessary. Commissioner Van Dan had discussed the state statutes with Mr. Pettersen and it appeared that it was really not defined in state statute and that there really wasn't a way of liquidating the HRA or removing or impeaching current members. Mr. Pettersen wondered to what degree and manner the financial obligations of the HRA were segregated or integrated into the city. Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, said the HRA h�ad taken the position that the voter approved amendment did not affect the HRA. Mr. Knaak said he did not agree with that opinion and felt the two were linked and there were serious questions and issues. He felt the proposed ordinance clarifying the voter approved amendment would help avoid lawsuit. Mr. Pettersen said the circulators were trying to place tax limitations and control the rate of growth upon local government while protecting the bond rating and not to place an undue hardship on the city or HRA. There was a discussion on bonds and how they are let and what would happen if a company closed down and failed to keep their financial obligations. DRAFT 72 CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 29, 2001 PAGE 4 Mr. Pettersen wondered if there were other areas in the charter that could possibly be amended to reflect some of the concerns. Mr. Knaak said that they should resist changing any other parts of , the city charter at this time as that would be a substantive change to the charter. He said they were only trying to clarify the voter approved amendment at this time and not to change. Commissioner Gordon asked if there were any loopholes that hadn't been changed. Mr. Knaak said that was not their mission in the committee but felt the clarifying language should resolve those kinds of issues. Chairperson Warren asked Mr. Knaak if he was comfortable with the proposed ordinance. Mr. Knaak noted that the ordinance clarified the language of the voter approved amendment. Mr. Pettersen noted the voter approved amendment was written very tight and restrictive on the city and that some areas of change which might create problems for the city that may have been unintended. He was concerned that if the city spent all of its reserves and had to meet general obligations they could raise the required revenue without going to the voters. He again noted that sometimes you have to trust the elected officials will do the right thing. Ms. Jorgenson said there was accountability of the city officials during the budget process and annual Board of Review and that if the voters didn't like what was happening they were given the option every other year of electing new officials. Mr. Pettersen wondered if the following language, "arid for which fees are already being charged" should be included in paragraph 3B regazding new fees. Mr. Knaalc said if the Charter Commission wanted to amend that language they could and it might be appropriate, but he preferred to leave the language as it was intended at this time. There was a discussion about going back to the Ad Hoc Work Group to determine what their thoughts might be. If this were done it take more time before it could get to the Council and could impact some decisions the council might make earlier in the spring. Commissioner Van Dan was concerned the city might create a new license to create revenue, such as require a city bicycle license in addition to the state license. She understood there were two types of charges, one for archival and personnel expenses for city reimbursement and the other was for a service, her example that o�'�snowplowing. Commissioner Van Dan suggested that the city could decide it did not want to provide snowplowing services any more as part of its budget and would start charging homeowners for that service if they wanted their streets plowed. Mr. Knaak explained that would be a new tax or fee and that issue would have to go to the voters. He thought it was bad policy and felt that the citizens would most likely prevent that from occurring. Commissioner Van Dan said fuel charges were going to continue to increase and may get too expensive for the city to pay for it. Commissioner Van Dan felt in that case they would have to go to the taxpayers, and did not want to see an abuse of the system. DRAFT 73 CHARTER COMMISSION MEETIl�iG OF JANUARY 29, 2001 PAGE 5 After further discussion there appeazed to be consensus that the proposed ordinance would prevent that example from happening. Commissioner Gordon MOVED and Commissioner Holm seconded a motion to forwazd the « proposed clarifying amendment in ordinance format to the City Council as written, with the exception of not striking reference to Section 7.08 in the last pazagraph, if the Charter " Commission attorney concurs with the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Holm thought it would be a good idea if a member of the Charter Commission and a member of the Petition Group could present this proposed ordinance to the City Council. There was a discussion about whether or not to send out an information letter regarding the proposed clarification amendment and if information was sent, who it would be sent to. Mr. Knaak suggested that it be handled in the same way other amendments had been handled in the past so that a precedent was not set, and that the notice be published in the official newspaper and posted publicly as required by state statute and city charter. Pete Eisenzimmer was concerned that everyone be treated fairly and pointed to the Pawn Shop and Junk Yard business licenses. Ms. Skogen asked a question as to why these two types of businesses were treated differently than the other business licenses. It was explained that due to the type of businesses they were, with possible ground contamination clean-up or with the investigative type nature of the pawn shop that they were addressed separately. Commissioner Gordon called for the question. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON WARREN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS Commissioner Gordon MOVED and Commissioner Nielsen seconded a motion to recommend to the Chief Judge the appointment of Scott "Harry" Heck and Carter Hendricks to the Charter Commission and to recommend the reappoinhnent of Commissioners Findell, Gordon, Soule and Van Dan for their second term. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON WARREN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. . - Commissioner Gordon MOVED and Chairperson Warren seconded a motion appointing Commissioners Van Dan, Holm and Nielsen to the Nominating Committee to prepare a report for the next Charter meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON WARREN DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: DRAFT 74 CHARTER C(�MNIISSION MEE'TII�1G OF JANUARY 29, �001 PAGE 6 MOTION by Commissioner Gordon seconded by Commissioner Holm to table items 3 and 4 for the next meeting and to adjoum the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON WARREN DECLARED T'HE MOTION CARRIED AND THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:03 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Debra A. Skogen City Clerk/Staff Liaison � � . 75 Terpstra, Black, Brandell, Jensen & Moore Ronald G. Black Kim E. Brandell Jeffery J. Jensen Elizabeth K. Moore Brian A. Park James A. Bumgardner John W. Terpstra (retired) Fridley Charter Commission c/o Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk City of Fridley Fridley Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 Re: Chapter 7 Charter Amendment Dear Commission: January 30, 2001 Accacbmenc 2 Attorneys at Law 913 Main Street Etk River, MN 55330-150$ (763) 441-7040 ofc (763) 441-0901 fax VIA FACSIMILE & U.S. MAIL (763) 571-1287 In accordance with your request, I reviewed an ORDINANCE designed to amend the Fridley Charter. As I understand it, the proposed ORDINANCE would amend the City Charter to modify provisions which were discussed last spring and enacted by the electorate on November 7, 2000. From our previous discussions and my review of the documents which were forwarded by Debra Skogen on January 30, 2001, it appears the City Charter was amended by the electorate in November 2000 in an attempt to limit the City's ability to tax. After passage of the amendment, those charged with the duty to implement the amendment Ithe City Attorney, HRA, City staff, etc.) concluded that the language in the amendment passed by the electorate, created potentially dangerous and costly problems for the City. In an attempt to remedy potential difficulties created by the amendment as passed by the electorate in November 2000, an ad hoc committee was created and that committee has proposed an ORDINANCE (the ORDINANCE you asked me to review) which was designed to correct problems created by the confusing language contained within the amendment passed by the electorate in November 2000 without frustrating the electorate's ctearly- stated goal of limiting the City's ability to tax. We have reviewed the documents presented by Ms. Skogen, discussed them with City Clerk Debra Skogen and City Attorney Fritz Knaak, and as a result of that review and those discussions, recommend that the Charter Commission approve the proposed amendment as articulated in the proposed ORDINANCE. It is our opinion that the Commission should approve the proposed language as it forwards the electorate's goals, as articulated in the November 2000 election, without compromising the City's ability to conduct business. F �MISC�DATAIFItIDLEY.11i� 76 City Cierk's Office Date Re��lved a /-o / fon�b to �� i � Fridley Charter Commission January 30, 2001 , Page Two , r a If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. EKM/ke F:VNISCIDATAIFRIOLEY.1 LI Sincerely, TERPSTRA, BLACK, BRANDELL, JENSEN & MOORE '� /� /�NL �-�, Elizabe K. Moore 77 Attachment 3 ORDINANCE NO. a AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER PERTAINING TO TAXATION AND FINANCES The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: That Section 7.02.1 of the Fridley City Charter be hereby amended as follows: Section 7.02. POWER OF TAXATION 1. The City shall have, in addition to the powers by this Charter expressly or impliedly granted, all the powers to raise money by taxation pursuant to the laws of the State which aze applicable to cities of the class of which it may be a member from time to time, provided that the amount of taxes levied against real and personal property within the City for general City purposes shall not exceed in dollars, a tax levy that is greater than the prior year tax levy increased by an inflationary index, or 5%, whichever is least. Said inflationary index shall be that as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area. (Ref. Ord. 592 and 1102 and 11/7/00 Amendment) Nothing in this provision shall be construed to impair any general obligarion the City may have in support of otherwise lawful indebtedness or similar obligation supported by the full faith and credit of the City, provided, however, that long-term, general obligation indebtedness shall not be used for the purpose of funding the routine and daily business operations of the City. That Section 7.02.3 of the Fridley City Charter be hereby amended as follows: 3. Any other fees created, or increased beyond the limits set forth in subsecrion l, shall require voter approval as stipulated in subsection 2. A. For purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes, , sales and use taxes, , , ' , ' , � utilitv charges. recyclin"g,fees, gas and electric franchise fees and an other fee that produces a tax burden or direct financial obliQation for all propertv owners and/or residents of Fridle� B. For the purposes of this section, the term "fees" does not include: Parks and Recreation Department participation fees, charges for photo-copying, sales of municipal liquor store products, or civil and criminal fines and other charges collected in cases of restitution or violation of law or contract. The term "fees" also does not include rental housing,fees. buildin� permit fees, liquor license fees, the extension or transfer ofcable television service authoritv to additiona! service providers or which fees are alreadv being charged, �ees for the operation of iunk : Ordinance No. Page �oi. vards. annual license ees or the operation ofpawn shops and other regulated business. and anv other charQe %r services including health and sa�tv related � Code enforcement, and other goods services or materials routinelv provided bv the Citv to its citizens or other members ofthe public which bv law must be limited to the actual cost of the service beinQ provided The term "fees " shall not " include anv soecial assessments made under Minnesota Statutes ,�429 C. For the purposes of this subsection, "fee increase" include , �e; a new tax or fee, a monetary increase in an existing tax or fee, a tax or fee rate increase, an expansion in the legal definition of a tax or fee base, and an extension of an espiring tax or fee. D. For the purposes of this subsection, "city" includes, ,�e City itself and all of its departments and agencie , ', °"'"" °"'"' ' ��" * '�� ` '�'�' ''� ''� that are organized to exercise the "Powers o the Citv " as defined in Chapter 1 of this Charter "Citv" shall not include anv bodv o��overnment owing its existence to separate constitutional or statutorv authoritv outside of the Charter regardless of whether that other bodv o�' �overnment has iurisdiction or performs duties and services within the boundaries o� Cih�. t E. For the purpose of addressing natural disasters this subsection does not apply to any specific emergency measure authorized in Chapter 7, Section .08 (7.08). PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2001. ATTEST.• Debra A. Skogen, Ciry Clerk Public Hearing: First Reading: Second Reading.• Publication: �� Scott J. Lttnd, Mayor � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5, 2001 GTY OF FRIDLEY INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS :�