Loading...
01/22/2001 - 00008901THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF JANUARY 22, 2001 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: Fridley Jaycee 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 call 763-786-7230 or the Blaine Jaycees. Councilmember Wolfe stated that he used to be in the 7aycees and knows they do an incredible amount for the schools and neighbors. Mr. Carter Hendricks stated that he would like to keep in contact 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 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, 2001. 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 e�tended 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 73rd 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 44th Avenue and Main Street. Staff proposed to reline the 10-inch sanitary sewer line that runs between 57th Place to University Avenue along 57th 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 ESTABLISHING A TRI-CITY TASK FORCE TO STUDY THE WATER QUALITY 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. 7ennifer 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 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 4 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 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 for the Month of October, 2000 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the agenda. Wolfe. $ 5,000.00 $18,360.00 Seconded by Councilmember UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM,VISITORS: No visitors in the audience spoke. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 5 NEW BUSINESS: 12. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 223, CONCERNING MANUFACTURED HOME PARKS, REQUIRING OWNERS TO PAY RELOCATION EXPENSES TO 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 appro�mately 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 met 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 7anuary 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 si�y-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 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 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 6 the actual relocation costs, or an average of the actual relocation costs or an average of the estimated relocation costs." This 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 that provision is to address the scenario in which no one actually moves, and staff has no actual relocation costs to use in terms of calculating the average. 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. Knaak if without a provision that excludes the mortgage holders from the requirements of this particular ordinance, would conceivable that a park owner 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 to assume the State Legislature would put the exclusions in here. Attorneys who are representing mortgage holders need to ensure that 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 e�sting 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 NIN�IA 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 NIN�IA. Mayor Lund stated that NIN�IA 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 Brunner, 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 si�ty 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 si�ty days before the closing of the park If you were fortunate to find affordable housing and are ready to go, waiting the si�ty 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 consequences, 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 belongings 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 si�ty 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 NIN�IA was doing on it. She put Ms. Lynne into contact with the M1V�IA which they are 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. Councilmember Billings asked who would 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 information 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. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 11 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. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2001 PAGE 12 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 N�IFA 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. Mr. 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 some inconveniences while their home was moved. In Mankato some of the park was being moved for commercial development and those tenants were 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 there is a closing, there would be a public hearing before City Council of Fridley. Then the facts will be known as to exactly what is happening. 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 ne�t 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 si�ty-day rule in this case. 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. 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 e�sting 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 of the 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 se�ually oriented business but code states: "Se�ually 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 staffs 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 e�sting 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 met 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 meant. 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 residentially 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 terrific 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. 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 bollards 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 fi�ture 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 fi�tures are square, and the lamp is inside the fi�ture. 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. Mr. 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 parking 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 work with staff; 13) All e�sting asphalt shall be removed by 7uly 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. 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