10/14/2002 - 00024648MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF
OCTOBER 14, 2002
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 Bolkcom and Councilmember Wolfe
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
OTHERS PRESENT: William W. Burns, City Manager
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Jon H. Haukaas, Public Works Director
Dave Sallman, Director of Public Safety
Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator
Frederick Knaak, City Attorney
APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of September 23, 2002
APPROVED.
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the proposed consent agenda as presented.
Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
SEPTEMBER 18, 2002.
RECEIVED.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 2
2. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
OCTOBER 2, 2002.
RECEIVED.
3. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #02-09, BY KEVIN SWANSON, TO
ALLOW A SECOND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE OVER 240 SQUARE FEET
FOR STORAGE AND RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT, GENERALLY
LOCATED AT 7053 HICKORY DRIVE N.E. (WARD 3).
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval
subject to six stipulations.
APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #02-09, WITH THE FOLLOWING
STIPULATIONS: 1) PETITIONER SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY
BUILDING PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION; 2) THE STRUCTURE
SHALL NOT BE USED FOR A HOME OCCUPATION OR LIVING AREA; 3)
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MUST
NOT EXCEED 1,400 SQUARE FEET; 4) GARAGE SHALL BE
ARCHITECTURALLY COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING HOME AND
FINISHED WITH SAME SIDING AND COLOR SCHEME; 5) ALL VEHICLES
SHALL BE STORED ON A HARD SURFACE AS APPROVED BY THE CITY; 6)
STAFF SHALL CONDUCT REGULAR INSPECTIONS OF THE SITE. IF, AT
ANY TIME, A TRAIL SIMULATING A DRIVEWAY IS PRESENT, A HARD
SURFACE DRIVEWAY, AS APPROVED BY THE CITY, WILL NEED TO BE
INSTALLED WITHIN 90 DAYS.
4. VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #02-09, BY PAUL WESTBY, TO INCREASE THE
ALLOWABLE SIZE OF A SIGN FROM 24 SQUARE FEET TO 38 SQUARE
FEET AND TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SETBACK OF A SIGN FROM A
DRIVEWAY FROM 10 FEET TO 2 FEET, TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A MONUMENT SIGN, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6425 HIGHWAY 65
N.E. (WARD 2).
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated the Appeals Commission approved the setback variance
but denied the sign variance at their September 25 meeting. The setback variance was
allowed due to the City's fire access requirements. There was no apparent hardship,
however, to justify increasing the size of the sign and the Appeals Commission rejected
that. Staff recommended Council's approval of the setback variance and denial of the sign
variance.
APPROVED VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #02-09, BY PAUL WESTBY TO
REDUCE THE REQUIRED SETBACK OF A SIGN FROM A DRIVEWAY
FROM 10 FEET TO 2 FEET TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
MONUMENT SIGN AND DENIED A REQUEST TO INCREASE THE
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 3
ALLOWABLE SIZE OF A SIGN FROM 24 SQUARE FEET TO 38 SQUARE
FEET.
5. SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR OCTOBER 28, 2002, TO CONSIDER
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 506 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO SNOW REMOVAL — VIOLATION AND TOWING.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING FOR OCTOBER 28, 2002.
6. CONSIDERATION OF MOTION TO APPOINT JAMIE A. RAMACHER TO
THE POSITION OF RECREATION SUPERVISOR.
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated this position was previously vacated by Deborah
Campobasso. Ms. Ramacher was chosen from 117 applicants for the position. She has a
Bachelor's of Science degree in Recreation and Leisure Services from the University of
Minnesota. Her experience includes work as the program coordinator for the City of
Shoreview where she has worked for the last 2 1/2 years. She has been an active member
and leader of the Minnesota Parks and Recreation Association and she has also served on
the University of Minnesota Professional Advisory Board where she evaluated the
curriculum and staffing at the University. Staff recommended Ms. Ramacher's
appointment.
APPOINTED JAMIE A. RAMACHER TO THE POSITION OF RECREATION
SUPERVISIOR.
7. CLAIMS.
APPROVED CLAIM NOS. 107559 THROUGH 108079.
8. LICENSES.
APPROVED ALL LICENSES AS SUBMITTED.
9. ESTIMATES.
APPROVED THE FOLLOWING ESTIMATES:
Ron Kassa Construction
6005 — 250t'` Street East
Elko, MN 55020
2002 Miscellaneous Concrete Repair
Project No. 344
Estimate No. 6 $ 13,596.11
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 4
Park Construction Company
7900 Beech Street N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432-1795
57t'` Avenue Sanitary Sewer Improvement
Project No. 346
Estimate No. 4 $ 72,038.99
Forest Lake Contracting, Inc.
14777 Lake Drive
Forest Lake, MN 55025-9461
Hartman Circle Watermain Looping
Project No. 347
Estimate No. 4 $ 8,141.50
W.B. Miller
6701 Norris Lake Road NW
Elk River, NIN 55330
2002 Street Improvement
Project No. ST. 2002 — 1
Estimate No. 7 $ 96,202.99
ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA:
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if she approved the consent agenda if she was agreeing to the
setback for Dr. Westby sign and denying the size increase for the sign.
Mr. Burns agreed.
Councilmember Bolkcom inquired as to the change being made in the snow removal ordinance.
Mr. Burns responded that the date change from May 1 to April 1 was made last year but it was
inadvertently not changed in one section of the City Code.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to adopt the consent agenda as presented. Seconded by
Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 5
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adopt the agenda as presented. Seconded by
Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
OPEN FORUM, VISITORS:
Mayor Lund asked if there were any members in the audience who wished to speak to Council on
any non-agenda items.
Mr. Jack Kirkham, 430 - 67t'` Avenue, approached and stated that at the last meeting, he was
disturbed by the reaction given to a citizen who regarding a survey that was submitted on Brandes
Place. When asked if such a request would be a main factor of consideration of whether to
approve or deny the Brandes Place request, they were told it would be a consideration but not a
main consideration. He asked what other issues or factors were more important than the will of
the citizens. He stated that he did hear of some other factors that appeared to intimidate the
Council, such as the mention of the federal law and the Metropolitan Council Comprehensive
Plan. He said that this made him wonder where the plan even came from. He asked who wrote
the plan and who said this plan must be approved. He said his main concern is that we have come
to a point where a citizen has no longer any real self-determination; that the City Council has told
them generally.
Mayor Lund stated in relation to Mr. Kirkham's question, he stated he thought the staff and the
City Attorney would have some insight. He said that when he was talking to the gentleman at the
last City Council meeting, he may have made the statement that it would not be the only factor
taken into consideration. He stated that he thought it was important to get all the aspects in order
to make an educated decision.
Mr. Kirkham asked where the Comprehensive Plan originated. He asked if it was something that
was provided to the City based on the citizens' conveying a need to the government or if it was
something qualified through the Metropolitan Council and the HRA.
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, replied that the Comprehensive Plan is the City
of Fridley's document drafted by and for the City of Fridley. Citizens were invited to a series of
commission meetings and neighborhood meetings to talk about their visions and what they wanted
included in the comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Plan is ultimately approved by the
Metropolitan Council but it is a document drafted by staff, recommended and approved by the
Planning Commission and the City Council.
Councilmember Bolkcom mentioned that not only was it discussed at meetings but there were
also some surveys that were sent out by the Planning Commission. She said there was
neighborhood input and that Council also heard testimony from staff.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 6
Mr. Hickok stated it was a two-year process.
Councilmember Billings stated that at the beginning of the public hearing, there was a visual
presentation and the City Attorney read a decision by the Supreme Court. He asked if staff hat
that with them.
Mr. Hickok stated they did not have it and asked the City Attorney to respond.
Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that this was a decision by the Minnesota Supreme Court on a
case involving Northwestern College. The decision, which has been consistently upheld since, is
that neighborhood oppositions alone cannot serve as the basis for a valid zoning decision. In
other words, if you use neighborhood oppositions as the sole criteria or as the predominant
criteria in a zoning decision, it will be undoubtedly detrimental.
Councilmember Wolfe inquired whether he was talking about the neighborhood or the whole city.
Mr. Knaak stated it was his recollection that it was mostly the neighborhood immediately
surrounding Northwestern College in Arden Hills.
OLD BUSINESS:
10. RESOLUTION NO. 57-2002 SUSPENDING THE TOBACCO LICENSE FOR
JAMES NICKLOW AND THE SHOREWOOD RESTAURANT LOCATED AT
6161 HIGHWAY 65 N.E. (TABLED SEPTEMBER 9, 2002) (WARD 2).
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to remove this item from the table. Seconded by
Councilmember Billings.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Sallman, Director of Public Safety, stated that on September 9, 2002, the City Council tabled
the decision to suspend or revoke the tobacco license for the Shorewood Restaurant and asked
staff to look into the matter. He reported that the employee who sold the tobacco products did
plead guilty in county court. The City is recommending a suspension at this time until the $500
administrative fee is paid.
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to approve Resolution No. 57-2002, suspending the tobacco
license of the Shorewood Restaurant until December 31, 2002, and subsequently thereafter until
the $500 penalty is paid as required under Chapter 12 of the City Code. Seconded by
Councilmember Billings.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
NEW BUSINESS:
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 7
11. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #02-08, BY VAN-O-LITE, TO ALLOW
EXTERIOR STORAGE OF MATERIALS IN A C-2, GENERAL BUSINESS
DISTRICT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5945 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.
(WARD 1).
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that they received a letter from the
attorney representing Van-O-Lite asking if Council would consider putting this item on the
October 28, 2002, agenda, as he had a conflict and was unable to attend tonight's meeting.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table this item until October 28, 2002. Seconded by
Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to receive the letter for continuance. Seconded by
Councilmember Billings.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
12. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR THE MUNICIPAL GARAGE
EXPANSION PROJECT NO. 343.
Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, stated for the last year, they have put together a project for
the expansion of the offices and personnel facilities at the public works garage. He said they
opened it up for bids on October 8, 2002, and received 17 bids. The bids were within 15 percent
of each other. There are potentially two bidders depending on whether we approve an award
based on the base bid or on the base bid plus alternates. There were five alternates. They
included: 1) code required sprinkler system, 2) City log and entrance signage, 3) a window into
the mechanics bay from the upper office, 4) roof screening of inechanical units, and 5) e�terior
painting of the vehicle storage building.
Mr. Haukaas stated that during the last few days, there was concern that wage provisions were
not included in the bid documents. That was, however, covered and there is language in the
specifications stating that they must abide by all cities' policies which includes minimum wages.
He stated that is pretty common with all cities and counties at this point. He said they did contact
the potential low bidders and have received signed statements stating they will abide by all
prevailing wage rules.
Mr. Haukaas stated that staff's recommendation is to award the contract with all alternates
because each one has merit.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 8
Councilmember Barnette asked Mr. Haukaas if he could answer the question on comparable
wages for the general public.
Mr. Haukaas explained that prevailing wage rules are essentially a set of wage rates based on a
greater range of wages which evens the board with using union contractors and non-union
contractors. Cities, counties and MnDOT have adopted these standards.
Councilmember Bolkcom pointed out that "winter conditions" are mentioned. She inquired
whether it would cost less if we waited until spring.
Mr. Haukaas stated that they did not believe so as there is an annual increase in labor rates. He
said that right now there are a lot of contractors looking for work, and by the large number of
bids received, it tells us this is probably the best time to proceed.
Councilmember Bolkcom inquired as to the change in seasons for doing the work and comparing
the cost.
Mr. Haukaas replied that there are not a lot of employees right now as compared to ne�t summer.
Right now there are just the full-time employees and in the summer they will be working around
an additiona130 to 40 seasonal employees.
Dr. Burns, City Manager, asked what the successful bidder's amount was.
Mr. Haukaas replied they are recommending the approval of the award with all alternates to CM
Construction in the amount of $730,500.
Councilmember Wolfe replied his calculation of the bid came to a total of $736,950.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked what the budgeted amount was.
Dr. Burns replied $600,000.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked where the rest of the money was coming from.
Dr. Burns replied the fund balance was going to be from the construction fund.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there was enough money.
Dr. Burns responded that there was.
Mayor Lund asked if Mr. Haukaas would accept the recommended bid of CM Construction with
one or more of the alternates removed.
Mr. Haukaas replied that removing an alternate may change who ends up having the low bid. The
other firm involved is Spectra Building.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 9
Mayor Lund replied that the only question he had is why we are picking alternates.
Mr. Haukaas replied that may change who ends up with the award. If we take Spectra Building
with all alternates, the amount is at $731,950. There is only a$1,450 difference if you do it with
all alternates. The roof screening is on a number of buildings.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if anyone else has been asked to use the screening.
Mayor Lund asked if the roof screening was to protect from the sun and elements.
Mr. Haukaas answered it is visual screening. He said when they were first putting the project
together they looked at it as being more than just a personnel issue but also looked at the entire
facility for storage of vehicles and maintenance of vehicles.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if this project was also being done because of OSHA
requirements.
Mr. Haukaas answered those were some of the issues that were involved.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to award the construction contract for the Municipal
Garage Expansion Project No. 343, with all alternates, to CM Construction in the amount of
$730,500. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
13. RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, CPA
#02-01, TO CHANGE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM PUBLIC/SEMI-
PUBLIC TO MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THE CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6160 FIFTH STREET
N.E. (WARD 1).
14. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE
CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING
DISTRICTS (REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #02-01, BY BRANDES PLACE LTD.
PARTNERSHIP) (WARD 1).
15. APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST, PS #02-03, BY BRANDES PLACE
LTD. PARTNERSHIP, TO REPLAT PROPERTY INTO TWO LOTS,
GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6160 FIFTH STREET N.E. (WARD 1).
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that Brandes Place Limited Partnership is
recommending three separate land use actions in order to construct a 16-unit townhouse style
multi-family development at 6120 Fifth Street N.E. The actions being requested are a plat,
comprehensive plan amendment, and a rezoning.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 10
Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, spoke of two issues in particular that he had. He stated at the last
meeting a majority vote was necessary. This has raised questions because the City's ordinance,
which is was based on the previous state statute that has been since amended, states that a two-
thirds or four-fifth's vote is required. In these instances, state statute will prevail. He referred to
the Attorney Generals Opinion (provided to Council) that addresses this exact same point with
another charter city to whom the question was directly asked.
Mr. Knaak said that the second issue he wanted to address was the presence in this case of
potential application of the Religious Land Use and Institutional Persons Act (RLUIPA). In this
case, there are two provisions of that Act which have to do with the fact that it is unlawful for the
City to impose a substantial burden upon the religious exercise of a person putting in a religious
assembly or institution. Regarding the question of whether or not the applicant's case is a
religious institution for purposes of the Act and whether this particular activity is a religious
exercise for the purposes of the Act, Mr. Knaak stated that no direct case law directly on point in
this instance. But it is no different here, since both of these are being served and present in this
case and we are dealing with a non-profit church-affiliated organization in addition to the fact that
he cannot definitively say that the provision of affordable housing is not a religious exercise.
Mr. Hickok stated the plat is being requested to create a new parcel for the construction of 16
townhome style multi-family units on the parcel. The Comprehensive Plan amendment is to
change the City's Future Land Use Map, designating the future land use as a newly created parcel
as multi-family housing. Finally, the rezoning of the new parcel to R-3 multi-family residential
will allow the construction of the townhomes. Brandes Place is on St. Williams' property in the
northeast corner of the campus. Brandes Place is seeking plat to divide the current St. Williams
property into separate parcels. The plat will create the lot descriptions necessary for transferring
the property from St. Williams to Brandes Place Limited Partnership. The creation of the second
parcel will allow the lot area needed to construct the proposed townhome units.
Mr. Hickok stated that the proposed lot for Brandes Place is 1.17 acres and proposed Lot 2, the
remaining campus is 5.8 acres. The proposed plat will not create any non-conformities for the
existing church on St. Williams' campus. Mr. Hickok stated that staff recommended approval of
the plat with the following stipulations:
1. Petitioner to dedicate street ROW as indicated on Preliminary Plat drawing.
2. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
3. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run-off
and management.
4. Storm pond maintenance agreement must be filed prior to issuance of building permits.
5. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and N URP ponding for entire site.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 11
6. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to
issuance of building permits.
7. Code required refuse and recycling enclosures must be installed.
8. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building
permit.
9. Petitioner to pay any required Park dedication fees.
10. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located
on the site are property capped or removed.
11. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay required park
fees prior to issuance of building permits.
12. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and
sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit.
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, reported that Brandes Place is seeking to amend
the future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan designating the new Brandes Place parcel,
Lot 1, to a multi-family residential property. He said that prior to the Brandes Place parcel being
rezoned, future land use designation on the site must be changed to Multi-Family Residential in
order for the rezoning to be in conformance.
Mr. Hickok said that the Comprehensive Plan is the vision for the City's future. Some of the
public designations placed under all conditional type uses within the City include churches,
schools, hospitals and city buildings. The design and location of the development will help
provide for a positive community image and will provide for the development of affordable
housing for all age groups. Due to the fact the proposed project helps us further a number of
goals in the Comprehensive Plan, staff recommended approval of the request with the twelve
stipulations.
Mr. Hickok said that there is also a rezoning request. Brandes Place Limited Partnership and
Church of St. Williams are seeking to rezone both of the parcels to R-3 Residential. St. Williams'
campus and the proposed Brandes Place project are currently a mix of R-2 (Two Family) and C-3
(General Shopping Center) zoning districts. This designation is necessary for the Brandes Place
development and is not an uncommon zoning designation for church property in Fridley.
Mr. Hickok stated the City authority can rezone property from one designation to another so long
as the zoning conforms with the Comprehensive Plan. The granting of this request would not
result in "spot zoning." The granting of this request would be an expansion of the e�sting R-3
zoning just to the north of the property (the Norwood Square property). There is very little
developable land in Fridley. Undeveloped multi-family sites are non-e�stent. This site is unique in
that it borders e�sting R-3 property and the expansion of this zoned district presents an
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 12
opportunity to expand housing options in Fridley. He said that staff recommended approval of
this as well with 12 stipulations as outlined above.
Mr. Hickok stated there were nine hours of public hearings between the Planning Commission and
the City Council. There was much testimony received and we have sought to answer the
questions that came up through that process. He said that there was one comment about having
enough affordable housing. He replied that the Comprehensive Plan addresses housing diversity
and affordability. Specifically, this comes directly from the Comprehensive Plan. In high demand
are affordable units with three or more bedrooms. Recent figures obtained through the Anoka
County Housing Coordinator for the Metro HRA indicate that there were 125 Anoka county
families for rental assistance since September 1999. Of the families waiting for three-bedroom
units, 19 or 60 percent were for Fridley units.
Mr. Hickok stated that answering the inquiry about crime, the Police Department has prepared
two different analyses of existing apartment complexes in Fridley. He said there are 141 units in
the market rate development and the subsidized development has with 196 units. For robberies
the market rate had 0, and the subsidized had 1. For warrant arrests, the market rate had 4 and
the subsidized had 3. For family assistance, the market rate had 17 and the subsidized 24.
"Miscellaneous" calls included medical, first responder-type calls. He wanted to point out that the
subsidized development is one-third senior. For Disorderly Conduct, the market rate had 6 and
the subsidized 18. For damage to property, market rate had 17 and subsidized had 1. For thefts,
market rate had 13 and subsidized 4. This example gives us a sense that crime exists and it is not
all at individual, subsidized or market rate units. It is important to know there are other factors
that influence some of the calls.
Mr. Hickok stated that the second comparison made by the Police Department was a comparison
of identical buildings with different management. The buildings are exactly the same design, are
built side-by-side but have different owners and different management. There is a significant
difference in the number of crimes. The time period was from the first nine and one-half months
of 2002. Assaults, 4-1; Burglary 1-1, Disturbing the Peace, 18-1, Criminal Se�ual Conduct, 2-0;
Theft, 5-2; Other Crimes, 11-1 (Total 41-6). Mr. Hickok thinks this really indicated that an
important factor is management. With respect to Project Based Section 8 development, the last
ten years of information are looked at, including information from previous states people have
lived in, previous credit information, previous crime information, and previous towns lived in.
Mr. Hickok stated it is an important thing to understand that management can make a difference
in crime statistics.
Mr. Hickok said that answering an inquiry that Fifth Street cannot handle additional traffic, the
street is a Minnesota State Aid (MSA) roadway. It was designed to collector standards. He
presented a visual chart of the Fifth Street traffic count history, for the Years 2001, 1997, 1995,
1991, 1985 and the average trips for two different segments, "Mississippi to 63rd" and "63rd to
61gt." He pointed out that the road was designed to collector standards allowing well over 4,000
trips. He said there and there are 2,600 to 4,600 in the segment of Mississippi to 63rd but there is
also the use by the Target employees. From 63rd to 61gt the numbers drop incredibly from 1985
through the year 2001 and have stayed there pretty much consistently; there was a difference of
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 13
1,550 to 1,450 cars on an average daily basis. We are looking at about 1,300 on that roadway
segment in 2001. Remember that each one of these units have the expectation of generating 7
trips (for 12 units) for the development each day.
Mr. Hickok proceeded to comment on the impact to schools. He said it was mentioned that the
schools are "swollen and that they can't afford these students." Mr. Hickok stated they have
asked the School District to respond to them and they have not taken any stance on this matter..
However, they have indicated the following: If 25 new students are added, an additional revenue
of $156,000 would be received by the school. An additional teacher may be required at the cost
of appro�mately $65,000, leaving $91,000 for additional school district funds based on 25 new
students.
Mr. Hickok stated that with respect to the comment about the area having too much multi-family
housing density, he provided an analysis of the City in half-mile segments which showed very
specific GIS data of the land use in each segment. He said that in each one of the areas, they use
mathematical and scientific information to determine the information. He stated that by looking at
the areas, 2 percent of the land is dedicated to R-2, 12 percent is dedicated to R-3 and 7 percent
of the overall land area is dedicated to R-2 or R-3 residential. He said it is important to
understand that density is relative to location and as you lay out a land use plan, there are areas
that are truly higher density than some neighborhoods. But one of the factors that makes higher
density work and is the higher capacity roadways that allow people to leave the development, not
travel through a single-family neighborhood. Mr. Hickok pointed out that by looking at the map,
we can see that there is higher density and more concentrated land use of commercial land along
those roadways because it allows for people to get in and out of those developments without
traversing where larger single-family developments are.
Mr. Hickok said that in answer to the comment that this development will flood Moon Plaza, the
designers of Brandes Place will be required to deal with storm water runoff, retention and a
treatment pond. It will be physically impossible for the development at Brandes Place to flood
Moon Plaza due to the elevation differences. The main problem with the Moon Plaza property is
its lack of storm water controls for its own runoff. This property is nearly all building or asphalt
parking lots with no ponding or other storm water retention/treatment opportunity which does
create its own problem.
Mr. Hickok stated that staff recommended approval of the rezoning request with the outlined
stipulations.
Councilmember Wolfe asked about the crime study and if there were any comparisons done
including residential single family.
Mr. Hickok replied it was requested that it be done using multi-family.
Councilmember Billings recalled the cooperative agreement between St. Williams and Catholic
Charities. He said that Brandes Place Limited Partnership, however, comes into this as an entity.
He said it was his understanding that the federal holder of the property would be Wells Fargo
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 14
Bank and they would then lease the property to Catholic Charities. He asked if the loan could be
sold, what type of lease it was, and who the titleholder would be.
Mr. Knaak replied that the question is in the conte�t of RLUIPA since that is the issue and that
changes somewhat the burden ultimately that the City agree with any of these applications.
Specifically, if this passes into the ownership of a third party that is more obviously a religious
institution, does that somehow mean that RLUIPA in those terms still applies. He stated he
believed the answer to the question is, no, it does not mean that. For example, school districts
routinely will lease space to religious organizations and communities for the purpose of
conducting religious services. No one argues that as a result of that, those are no longer religious
services or activities and that the school district owns the church. The issue as far as RLUIPA is
concerned is the nature of the activity itself, not necessarily who owns the property. It is his
understanding we are concerned right now with the present application. Any arrangements and
assurances that can provided by Catholic Charities are unknown. For purposes of RLUIPA the
fact that it is owned by a non-religious institution really is irrelevant; it is what is going on there,
that it is a religious exercise, and whether it involves the participation of a religious institution.
Dr. Burns asked about the connection with RLUIPA.
Mr. Knaak replied if Catholic Charities or some other organization were to provide free housing
as part of a ministry, would that or would that not be is the speculative argument. An argument
can certainly be made that this is part of their ministry.
Mr. Hickok stated he does have somewhat of an understanding from discussions with the
petitioner about the relationship with St. Williams Church and Catholic Charities, the Community
Housing Development Corporation, and the bank There is a complex financial arrangement that
depends on a 30-year relationship. The land is being given from St. Williams to the new
landowners with the specific stipulations that the land does not change ownership and that
agreement is drawn very tight. The bank and the federal funds depend on this also staying at the
current use. So, the funding package only works if there is a commitment to keep moving in the
direction that they are to provide affordable housing. On top on that understanding is that the
development corporation would not want to get the funds and turn around and contradict the
arrangements that were made. He stated that he has had their assurances that there is no
intention to turn it into another use or turn it over to another landowner.
Councilmember Barnette asked if they could sell the property.
Mr. Hickok explained that the arrangement is very much like many other religious institutions
across the country, that do not have their own method of financing a church so that they go to the
bank to do that. There are many, many churches that are funded through banks and institutions.
It does not in any way make them a church. It also puts them on the line as the debtor to the bank
as it gives them a commitment to repay the mortgage on that property.
Ms. 7anet Pope, Asset/Developer Manager for the Community Housing Development
Corporation, approached to provide an answer to the question. She stated that Brandes Place
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 15
Limited Partnership would be the title owner, Wells Fargo would be a limited partner and would
have very limited duties such as to invest funds based on the use that Brandes Place will be put to,
and that is affordable housing. Wells Fargo would pay penalties if the housing is used for
anything different than affordable housing or it is sold to anyone else who uses it for anything else
other than this specific use. The Community Housing Development Corporation will be the
managing general partner. The company has done this for 11 years and has never sold any of its
property. They will have a lease agreement with Catholic Charities whereby they will essentially
operate, manage, and provide the services to residents of the property.
Councilmember Barnette asked how the Community Housing Development Corporation would
still hold the title.
Ms. Pope replied that the Community Housing Development Corporation and Wells Fargo
formed a third entity called the Brandes Place Limited Partnership which will actually own the
property. This is all according to federal law.
Councilmember Barnette asked if the request for rezoning portion of this should fail, does the
whole procedure at this point stop or would there be a second reading two weeks from now.
Mr. Hickok replied that if the motion to approve this project fails, there is a process by
parliamentary procedure to create an opportunity to amend the motion.
Councilmember Barnette asked if the land would change hands at that stage.
Mr. Hickok responded that it is all tied together. If one fails, they all fail.
Councilmember Billings asked if someone could review the policies for screening tenants for the
proposed site.
Mr. Hickok replied that the screening procedures are for project-based Section 8 housing and are
contained in the packet. Section 8 tenant screening has a stricter process than many market-based
developments. The City has no control over the private landlord screening or not screening their
prospective residents. On the other hand, project-based goes through a tenant screening for all
prospective tenants, including rental, credit and criminal history. The last ten states the
prospective tenant has lived in are checked and 7 years of poor rental, criminal and credit history
are held against the prospective tenant.
Councilmember Billings asked would do the screening for the project.
Mr. Hickok responded that is part of the management project and is tied into the funding and
management arrangement. In this case it would Catholic Charities.
Councilmember Billings asked if they could explain the process of what they would do and how it
would work.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 16
Ms. Tracy Berglund, Assistant Administrator for Catholic Charities, stated that they do the
regular screening that Mr. Hickok talked about and also have a panel selection.
Councilmember Billings asked her to explain a little more about the panel selection.
Ms. Berglund replied that generally the panel is made up of senior management, property
management staff, staff from Catholic Charities and also staff from the local community.
Councilmember Barnette stated he was asked whether the buildings are accessible under the
Americans With Disabilities Act. He asked for an explanation of what measures have been made
and why they have to be made.
Mr. Hickok replied that two units that are required to be accessible in a 16-unit development such
as this. One is a physical accessibility unit which addresses physical challenges and the other is for
hearing or sight challenges. On the model there are two buildings side-by-side which were
identical. Those presumably would be the two northernmost buildings. The southern buildings,
particularly the building closest to the e�sting administration building on the church campus has
one unit that is a one-level unit, so the building would be designed in a way to allow a one-level
unit in a group of four to e�st. That is the unit for the physically challenged.
Councilmember Wolfe asked if the Section 8 screening could be more restrictive for Brandes
Place.
Mr. Hickok replied that the project-based screening process is the one described and, in this case,
is the one Catholic Charities would be responsible for. It would necessitate going back and
looking at the applicant's history, checking back ten states, checking the crime record and
checking the credit rating. That is a standard process. For a tenant lease situation, it is truly up to
the management of that complex. If they choose not to screen tenants, you may have a system
where a tenant has not been well screened and have problems because of that.
Councilmember Bolkcom said the City does have a rental ordinance and they will have to have a
permit to rent these properties. There is a conduct of code in the ordinance. There are provisions
in the rental ordinance about behavior of tenants. She said she knew they worked and she also
thought it was an opportunity for a landlord to get rid of a so-called problem tenant.
Mr. Hickok replied that that was true. He said that this is way the process is identical. Whether it
is a unit that has a subsidy or whether it is a market rate unit, there is truly an eviction process that
will eliminate the bad tenants. There is inspection of the units. We also have a code of conduct in
that ordinance that really keeps the management on their toes. If they get to a point where they
have a series of repeat offenses of a certain type, their license can be recalled.
Ms. Janet Kreutter, 5916 Second Street, stated she grew up in Coon Rapids and was a number.
She moved to Fridley where the schools are a small size. According to Minnesota state law, there
should only be 19 students in an elementary classroom. The first grade has four sections, four
teachers, and 24 kids per section. Second grade has three sections, three teachers, and 24 kids
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 17
per section. Third grade has four sections, four teachers, and 26 kids on the average. Fourth
grade has three sections, three kids, and 30 kids for an average. The seventh grade is full. She said
she wished that a senior development would be built. She said she believed that the estimate of
adding 47 kids would be too many for the schools.
Mayor Lund stated that with respect to her request that a senior center be built, the Council
cannot vote for senior housing as that is not the request before them. He said that asking for
senior housing would still result in a rezoning request.
Ms. Kreutter said she is talking about the schools. She graduated with over 900 kids and her
daughter graduated with 198. She said she believed that we're going to lose it.
Mayor Lund replied that the rezoning issue is currently being discussed. The property is now R-2
and the petitioner is asking for it to change to R-3. He said that what Ms. Kreutter is asking for
would also require an R-3 rezoning.
Mr. Dick Snyder, 5901 Second Street N.E., said he had lived in Fridley for 39 years and brought
up two kids. He feels there is a lot of affordable housing. His big concern is safety and the water
runoff situation.
Mr. Hickok replied that the Brandes Place project will be required to hold its own water. The law
requires that pre-imposed development water runoff needs to meet certain standards. The project
will not move forward with permits until a satisfactory solution for ponding has been created. As
for ponds in developments, it is not an unusual thing. As a matter of fact it is state law that
ponding occur on sites for all developments to e�st. We do not fence in ponds for the protection
of children. That is not a typical standard; they are created typically in the amenities of the
development.
Mayor Lund replied that when the Community Center was expanded, there was no ponding
originally there. When the City made a joint deal with the school district and added onto the
community center, a ponding area was created to take into consideration additional runoff of the
increased parking lot and increased impervious surfaces.
Councilmember Wolfe commented that we cannot separate seniors and other ages. That is
something the City cannot do. He knows a lot of people want a senior center, but the City is
unable to discriminate based on age.
Mr. Ed Sworsky, 491 - 61gt Avenue N.E., stated that when he went to school he was taught that
he lived in a democracy and they elected representatives who did your will and the majority would
rule. It seems to him that somewhere down the line the majority does not rule. He thinks that we
need to remember that Council is elected and they are representing the residents. We have
listened to more people who want it than people who don't want it.
Ms. Jody Gambel, 6020 Si�th Street N.E., asked if they used the same screening for the people
that live in other Catholic Charities buildings.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 18
Councilmember Billings asked for clarification of the question, asking if she wanted to know if
they use the same type of screening for the same types of facilities. They have several types of
facilities throughout the metropolitan Twin Cities area.
Ms. Gambel confirmed she was asking about similar facilities and if they use the same screening.
She also commented that on the traffic issue and that the road can handle the traffic. The
question is if the people, not the road, can handle all the traffic. She stated that we're talking
about a huge complex and she is a little frustrated that they keep answering the question about the
road, and that they're talking about the road, not the "people." She stated if you're talking about
Village Green, they have a lot problems and you can call them up and ask them yourself. She said
the ordinances do not always work and Village Green management can tell them that. She said
she thought this project was too overwhelming for their neighborhood.
Ms. Pope replied they do have tenant screening for similar type of buildings. They do have a very
broad range of facilities to give shelter. They have very strict screening for this type of facility.
Councilmember Bolkcom inquired if traffic counts are done on roadways for any type of rezoning.
She asked if they looked at the number of the cars that might go up and down any of the streets,
whether residential or feeder streets, and the increase in numbers. She asked whether we are
doing anything different when evaluating the traffic counts in this area compared to any other
proj ect.
Ms. Hickok replied no. He said that this is a uniform development standard that is used. He said
that everyone has their own perception of what development will do and what traffic will do, but
the numbers are what are utilized.
Mr. Marv Peters, 6220 Si�th Street N.E., asked if the Council received a packet sent out by his
son. Mayor Lund confirmed that they had. He stated there are questions and facts in the packet.
He stated he is a landlord. He said when Catholic Charities stated that they would be screening
tenants, that does not always work. He said it is difficult to You do not get factual information.
When you call another landlord and ask for references, if it's a bad tenant, they will say, yeah, he's
a pretty good one. He stated he could talk for hours about the difficulties he has had with
different tenants. He had two private investigators do his screening and it does not always work.
You only get certain information. He has also had trouble with gang members, and not knowing
they were gang members because he could not get that information. Keep that in mind.
Ms. Katy Vechell, 6201 Fifth Street N.E., approached and commented on the traffic. She stated
she conducted her own study on Monday, September 30, from 3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. She said
that within 30 minutes, 71 vehicles went by her house, and within one hour, 101 vehicles. She
stated that a total of 322 vehicles in three hours passed by her house, not counting 6 police
officers that went by, 2 community officers, 2 school buses, three large vehicles such as UPS and
Metro Mobility, three motorcycles, 14 people on bicycles, and 14 people walking. She stated that
was an average of one vehicle per second. She stated that sometimes she cannot even get out of
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 19
her driveway. She replied that there is a retirement home on her block and the residents walk up
and down the street with their walkers.
Mayor Lund asked Mr. Hickok if the traffic counts are required every four years.
Mr. Haukaas replied that traffic counts are required by MnDOT for state aid streets. He said that
right now they are on a four-year cycle. A lot of the fully developed communities elect to go to a
four-year cycle because traffic counts haven't changed much. He replied that Ms.
Vechell probably had very valid counts. A majority of the traffic occurs during the day. He said
they could put out a traffic counter strip and get another number. However, he feels safe
guessing it would be within the range they are talking about, 1400 cars a day.
Dr. Burns commented it should be pointed out that the last one done was in 2001.
Councilmember Wolfe inquired if the studies are done like MnDOT where they count cars per
hours.
Mr. Haukaas replied they use a rubber hose that goes across to a mechanical counter.
Mayor Lund asked how long they leave the hose to traffic count in a specific area.
Ms. Haukaas stated they will do it for a 48-hour period.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it was only during the week.
Mr. Haukaas replied that is correct.
Mayor Lund commented regarding the traffic count charge that from 63rd to 61gt, it is actually
down and the average appears to be around 1,400. He said that it also states that Fifth Street is a
Minnesota State Aid Roadway and it is designed as a collector and as a collector it is not unusual
to find 4,000 or more vehicles on the roadway.
Mr. Pete Eisenzimmer, 6535 Oakley Drive, stated he would like to know if Council would like the
Section 8 area across from them. He thinks that putting in senior housing would be better.
Mayor Lund commented to Mr. Eisenzimmer that he is bringing up the same issue that was
brought up earlier.
Mr. Eisenzimmer replied the people in that area do not want that project it in there. He said
Council should go back to the property owner and see if a senior center could be built there..
Mayor Lund commented that if they were to ask for a senior citizen building, it would require the
same type of zoning that is being requested.
Ms. Jean Hegberg, 5881 Second Street N.E., stated that 80 percent have said that they do not
want it. She said she has decided to run for City Council.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 20
Ms. Sue Watlov Phillips, 1355 Hillcrest Drive, asked if anyone has asked the organization how
the rent was going to be utilized? She also asked if this property is going to be treated any
differently than other similarly zoned property.
Mr. Hickok replied that it would not.
Mayor Lund replied they are giving them due process.
Councilmember Billings stated he believes it depends on what questions remain. He asked if City
staff asked different questions than they have for a similar project. He asked if the criteria was the
same as it would be for another project. He said the answer is yes. The City is not just city staff
or the City Council. The city is the people that live in the city. There are a number of people who
are asking a number of questions. He said that the City Council is trying to respond to those
questions and give Catholic Charities and St. Williams Church an opportunity to respond to the
questions of the neighborhood. So in the broader sense, is the petitioner being asked to respond
to questions that they might have otherwise been asked to respond to? Probably so, based on the
emotional feelings of the neighborhood, but he does not think, in terms of the legislative process
that the City Council and city staff are going through, that they are asking different questions than
they would normally ask the petitioner.
Mr. Roger Avery, 6010 Glenco Street N.E., states he would like to be sent a copy of the density
drawing.
Father Joseph Whalen, Pastor of the Church of St. William, stated that when they went through
the process in the winter and early spring of 2000, several open meetings were held not only for
parishioners of the parish but for neighbors as well, to discuss the donation of land. In the course
of those hearings, several questions arose about whether the land should be sold or used
differently. He said he thought the discussions were e�tensive, comprehensive, and met all of the
questions that were raised. During the process, it was determined that the land should be donated
to Catholic Charities.
Mr. Don Mahr, 6181 Fifth Street N.E., stated he lives right across the project and with respect to
what the priest just said, nobody informed him about it. He also believed it was all cut and dry
before the meeting.
Mr. Rusty Quinn, 6271 Si�th Street N.E., stated he has lived in Fridley for well over 40 years and
attends St. Michael's parish. He states the parishioners were not advised of this and were not
asked. He stated to his knowledge, 85 percent of the parishioners are against it.
Mayor Lund reminded Mr. Quinn that is a question for the church.
Councilmember Wolfe stated they have no say with how the church operates.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 21
Ms. Joanne Zmuda, 6051 Fourth Street N.E., commented on the safety of the holding pond. She
read an excerpt from RLUIPA stating that no government shall impose an incident of land use
regulation in a manner that imposes a financial burden on religious exercise of a person. To date
12 land cases have been decided under RLUIPA and not one case pertaining to land being used
for any other purpose other than religious worship or schools. For example, RLUIPA applies by
allowing an establishment of a place of worship such as allowing worship services in homes or
malls not zoned for such purpose. She states that is a big difference than what is being discussed
presently.
Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, replied that he did not know of any holding pond in the City
that has fences around it. That may be a decision of the property owner. The majority of the
ponds are considered dry ponds -- they only hold water immediately after it storms. There is no
requirement for fencing.
Mr. Avery asked is this a profit or non-profit corporation?
Ms. Pope approached and stated that ownership entity will be a for profit corporation, Brandes
Place Limited Partnership who will have to carry a non-profit corporation to manage the property
and provide services to the residents. Community Housing Development Corporation is the
general partners of the limited partnership that are one partnership -- that entity is non-profit.
Mr. Avery asked if it was a for profit organization?
Ms. Pope replied that it was a for profit organization that owns the land.
Mr. Joe Weber, 6021 Si�th Street N.E., approached and commented on the city map and noticed
some of the statistics. He said if you were to draw the map a little differently and start with Fifth
Street to the corner of Fridley, there is no question that this is where all the multi-units are. He
commented on the Village Green statistics and the definition of the road.
Mr. Hickok stated that if someone wants a copy of the map, they are welcome to it. The City is
broken up already into one-mile sections and for purposes here they were broken down into one-
half sections. He pointed out that the roadways are there and this area is ne�t to a major
transportation route and certainly would fit the land use tenants.
Mayor Lund stated there was another comment about the street being designated as a collector
street, that it is more of a thoroughfare since Si�th Street does not go all the way to Mississippi..
Mr. Kirkham approached and stated he had a few things he wanted to address. One was about
the splitting up of the segments showing the traffic on the roadway. He stated to Mr. Hickok he
knew he had put in a lot of work into the presentation and asked him who was paying him,
Catholic Charities or the City of Fridley.
Councilmember Billings replied that Mr. Hickok had provided the answers to the questions that
the neighborhood and City Council asked. He said he thought he has done it in a fair and
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 22
objective manner. He said he thought Mr. Kirkham's comment was totally, completely
inappropriate and out of place and requested that Mr. Kirkham apologize to him.
Mr. Kirkham apologized to Mr. Hickok Mr. Kirkham stated he had a question about the
easement and right-of-way for the area of the map indicated by the purple. At the last council
meeting someone asked what the difference was.
Mr. Hickok replied that it is most typical in a plat to have the street surrounding the plat
dedicated as right-of-way. It does not at all change the way we serve the property in terms of
street cleaning and maintenance.
Mr. Kirkham commented how the property in question was properly zoned R-2. He said he
thought the correct comparison would be to compare R-3 multiple housing statistics to R-1 and
R-2.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is a lot of talk about whether there is more crime at places
that have Section 8 than at those places that do not accept Section 8. She stated she did believe
that Mr. Hickok did answer the question. What they did try to do was compare an area that does
have Section 8 and one that does not. She commented that there are some single-family homes
that are rental properties that we have issues with.
Ms. Mary Vasecki, 6909 Hickory Drive N.E., asked how many possible uses there could be
without any variation from building codes. She said that according to RLUIPA you do not have
to vote for it if it causes hardship to the community. She stated she would contest that putting
many units on that property would cause hardship to the community because of the schools. She
said that it is a proven statistic that lower-income students require more resources in the school
district. She stated she believed affordable housing is good but added if you go through the
newspaper you will see that Fridley has more affordable housing than any of the other
communities around. She stated that she has her own rental property.
Mr. Ed Sworsky, 491 - 61gt Avenue N.E., approached and stated he wanted to say that the roads
in Fridley are beautiful. He commented that after the State pays for a portion of the paved roads,
so do the residents.
Mr. Eisenzimmer commented about the holding ponds containing a lot of mosquitoes and that the
more ponds, the more breeding there is, which in turn, brings in more medical problems.
Mayor Lund pointed out the Attorney General's opinion that adopting an amendment of a certain
zoning amendments would require a majority of voting members. In other words, a 3-2 vote
would prevail.
Councilmember Wolfe stated the citizens' input does count. Council received a lot of petitions.
He said goes by what he has seen. It is very clear to him people are concerned about the drop in
property value. Also, health and welfare was a concern. He commented on the statement that we
need more housing, and stated according to statistics the percentage of Fridley residents who own
or occupy homes is 66. Rental homes are occupied by 34 percent.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 23
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she thought this is a tough emotional issue. She stated that a
lot of people were unable to comment, no one came to her home with a petition, and there was no
citywide telephone survey. She said she thinks they are placing judgment on people who are not
as fortunate as we are and we do not have all the facts. She said that people are making
assumptions that suddenly since there are 16 townhomes, they are going to be overrun with traffic
and crime. She said if the project does go through the Church and Catholic Charities should be
held responsible for their tenants. Just like we need to hold our other landlords responsible. She
said we need to judge based on the facts.
Councilmember Wolfe commented he thought the concept is wonderful. He just believed that the
neighborhood is overwhelmed--mathematically, 16 1/2 to 1.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked him if legally, we can base this solely on the opposition from the
neighbors.
Councilmember Barnette commented that with respect to the issue of senior housing,
unfortunately they are not dealing with it at this time. He said they have heard about the politics
within the church and that is none of their business. He thinks this particular neighborhood has its
share of multiple housing. He was a councilmember back in the 70's and 80's and they had some
of these same kinds of issues come up at that time. They had a request from Anoka County to
provide four units for handicapped adults on 54t'` and Fifth Street and they heard some of the
same arguments at that time and he voted in favor. Also in 1980, he was on the Council when the
Village Green request was made and he voted for that also. He was also the chairman of the
committee formed when the Medtronics Corporation built their site between Fridley and
Columbia Heights. They had an independent study done of the housing in Fridley and they found
at that time about 75 percent of all Fridley properties fell at or below the affordable housing limit
set by the Metropolitan Council. At that time he thought the figure was $144,000. He asked
himself, does Fridley have its share or more of its share of rental units and affordable housing. In
relationship to contiguous districts and communities around Fridley, he personally thought the
answer is yes. He asked if this rezoning request was a good fit for what he sees as the future of
Fridley. He felt he had to answer no. He thought the fact of the school district is a mute point.
He asked if this request had the support of the local neighbors, which is no. But, he said, we do
not know what the other 27,000 people in Fridley thought. Finally, as Mr. Sworsky brought up,
we live in a representative form of government. We cannot have a public hearing or town
meeting on every issue that comes up. That it why the Council is elected.
Mayor Lund commented he looked at what he thought was best for the City of Fridley. The
current zoning appears to be appropriately zoned as R-2. He said he would vote for it to remain
that way. He stated that because of the negative comments he sometimes felt compelled to vote
differently.
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that we have a responsibility to have affordable rental
homes. She said that five years from now there won't be the impact that people think is going to
happen.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 24
Councilmember Billings commented that there has been a tremendous amount of telephone calls,
etc., regarding this issue. He appreciated the willingness of the people to address the issue. He
said he has been telling everyone since day one that he makes his decisions based on fact, state
statutes, city ordinances, the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of
Minnesota, and City Charter. He has said all along that his decision was going to be based on the
facts, not on emotions. They as a City Council are specifically looking at whether they should
split the property into two parcels and specifically whether they are going to rezone the property.
He is not basing his decision on the specific use that the property owner is planning on using the
property for. He is basing his decision on whether or not R-3, whether used for senior, low-
income, or market rate housing, is an appropriate use of the property. He said that as far as he
was concerned RLUIPA has no impact on what he is about to vote on and may or may not apply
to this case. He said he is voting on what he sees are the facts and laws before him. There are a
number of other laws that impacted his decision. One is the state law that we cannot let the
Council in any issue cannot be arbitrary and capricious. They have already zoned a small portion
just north of this property R-3. Although there were not as many people that were opposed to
Norwood Square project than there are in this land use, they were hearing some of the same
arguments that it was going to be too much traffic, too dense, etc. The different this time is that
the arguments are based on a tremendous amount of fear. He said he is not very happy about that
and feels it is totally inappropriate. We had similar concerns back in the early eighties when
Community Action wanted to put in a facility on, he believes Fifth Street at the 5400 block Now
some 15 years later, the people down the road think they are some of the greatest neighbors they
got and have more problems with neighbors that live in single-family homes. He has to consider
the responsibility he has to all the citizens of Fridley plus the financial responsibility he has. There
are any number of reasons a property owner who receives a decision of the City Council that they
don't like can seek litigation. The church is not threatening us with litigation, but he always has to
keep in mind that if the petitioner disagrees there is that possibility. He believes in this case, if he
were to vote against it and the petitioner would disagree, he thinks it highly likely that it would
end up in court. In the Community Actions case, the City Council voted against the project.
Community Actions did not like the decision of the City Council, went to court. He said he
encouraged those in the neighborhood to contact Catholic Charities and the church and see if they
would consider senior housing. He is going to be voting in favor of all three items as the
responsibility of a member of the City Council.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve preliminary Plat Request, PS #02-03, by
Brandes Place Limited Partnership to replat property into two lots, generally located at 6160 Fifth
Street N.E. with twelve stipulations. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER
BOLKCOM VOTING AYE, AND MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE,
AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION FAILED.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve the resolution approving a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment, CPA #02-01, to Change Lane Use Designation from Public/Semi-Public to Multi-
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2002 PAGE 25
Family Residential in the City's Comprehensive Plan, generally located at 6160 Fifth Street N.E.
Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER
BOLKCOM VOTING AYE, AND MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE,
AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION FAILED.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings, to approve the first reading of an ordinance to amend the
City Code of the City of Fridley to make a change in zoning districts pursuant to Rezoning
Request, ZOA #02-01 by Brandes Place Limited Partnership with 12 stipulations.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER
BOLKCOM VOTING AYE, AND MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE,
AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION FAILED.
16. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS.
None.
ADJOURN:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember
Wolfe.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
OCTOBER 14, 2002, CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:36 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Denise M. Letendre Scott J. Lund
Recording Secretary Mayor