The URL can be used to link to this page

10/13/2003 - 4615I 1 �y . r � � CffY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 ?:30 p.m. - City Council Chambers Attendance Sheet ALFASF AR/NT NAMF, ADDRFSS ANa /TFM NUMBFR YOU ARF /NTFRFST�D /N. �� , «< < �� a � � �� i��`am+� {t��'��r��r'� �� " �' ,��`� �r'�r�es�� ,� � , z.... �� F� rc. ,,. � ,.,. ,, .... , �� . , , �.. -- � ;�. , �:� � 3�� ,,,,, . . .. , ,..,.. r.. „ ... _ . _ , ._ �-i2- � r` ' ' V� ' J C> l�t=�T `_ ��t l. � t.-1�..� 5'� `�-l� I ��i� �...,� � �- . �� (�: , � C FF � � j � �. �'� � " �2t �L�j .D�= .� �� - + , : �, ;-�� ;�:.� � �' ;� ! S l� cl�= i � (h� '•�—� I'6LE. L °� �V` � ,i --' �� -1 e: � �-- j r�� ;� t%' j: f 1'.� ;: �' �; L.�, .�, ,. f� ;,�" C; .a r �� !� -a.C,;:��:- ,��' � 7 c r..�..� �'.� G� �-� J� ��'� �- �� I �i�.� � � C L K � `�nr� � � L` S `1 L; � n� �2 l �J i" � C.� � —..�C � !'1 � �'1V1(.� �-=��a ��, F�21 I� L�..�' ��'' r 1U1�� j `={� f� Lc'-t:ti Wv �1. ��: � v� �. \ ir ��:. r._�% S� �� S-�: .�.2.�> �� M� S��'�- � i� C�� , � y�� „ �.�. �' `;�-"'� �,�..�"°� �- �` �-,�,, 1��`^ �� r c � ot c,� ir/ 3 $ �o G' � G�% /�% _) � / 2 /1 M � j i;" ; , i � � �„�'� f ,�'-� � � �) `��/-� , � ` CRY OF FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 The City of Fridley will not discriminate against or harass anyone in the admission or access to, or treatment, or employment in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to a11ow individuals with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require a�iliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD1572-3534) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PRESENTATION: Northstar Commuter Rail Project APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of September 29, 2003 NEW BUSINESS: Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of October 1, 2003 ............................................................ 1- 3 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 2. Special Use Permit Request, SP #03-15, by Dan Seekamp, to Allow the Construction of a Second Accessory Structure,Generally Located at 7055 East River Road N.E. (Ward 3) ................................................. 4- 7 3. Variance Request, VAR #03-16, by Bob's Produce Ranch, to Reduce the Setback of a Free-Standing Sign, Generally Located at 7620 University AvenueN.E. (Ward 3) .......................................................................................... 8- 16 4. Resolution Calling for a Public Hearing on the Modification of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 17 ....................................................................... 17 - 22 5. Approve Agreement with WSB & Associates, Inc., for Construction Services for the University AvenuePond Project ......................................................................................... 23 6. Receive Bids and Award Contract for the University Avenue Storm Water Treatment PondProject ...................................................................................................... 24 - 26 � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 7. Resolution Designating Time and Number of Council Meetings for 2004 ............................................................................. 27 - 29 8. Claims ....................................................................................................... 30 9. Licenses ....................................................................................................... 31 - 33 10. Estimates ....................................................................................................... 34 ADOPTION OF AGENDA. OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: Consideration of items not on Agenda —15 minutes. 1 � PUBLIC HEARINGS: 11. Consideration of the Assessment for the 2003 Nuisance Abatement Project ............................................................... 35 - 36 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 PAGE 4 PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED): 12. Consideration of the Assessment for Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2002 —1 ....................................................................................................... 37 - 38 NEW BUSINESS: 13. Resolution Adopting the Assessment for the 2003 Nuisance Abatement ................................................................................. 39 - 41 14. Resolution Adopting the Assessment for the 2002 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2002 —1 .......................................... 42 - 50 15. Consideration of a Hotel/Motel License Request by Wayne Rixmann for Livinn Suites, Generally Located at 5201 Central Avenue N.E. (Ward 1) ................................................. 51 - 52 : 16. Informal Status Reports ..................................................................................... 53 ADJOURN. � 0 CITY OF FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL NIEETING MINUTES SEPTE�IBER 29, 2003 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 OTHERS PRESENT: William W. Burns, City Manager - Richard Pribyl, Finance Director/Treasurer Scott Hickok, Community Development Director _ Myra Harris, Public Safety Projects Coordinator Frederic Knaak, City Attorney PROCLAMATIONS: Student Foreign Exchange Week: September 29 through October 5, 2003 Mayor Lund read and presented a proclamation for Student Foreign Exchange Week to Nat Boonjunwetvat from Thailand, Andrea Mier-Vaca from Bolivia, and Luis Pereira from Paraguay. The Mayor thanked Sue Davis for her help and dedication. Fire Prevention Week: October 6 through 12, 2003 - Mayor Lund read and presented a proclamation for Fire Prevention Week to Ralph Messer from the Fridley Fire Department. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of August 25, 2003. APPROVED. 0 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING NIINUTES OF SEPTEIVIBER 29, 2003 PAGE 2 NEW BUSINESS: 1. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING CONIiVIISSION MEETING OF SEPTENIBER 17, 2003. RECEIVED. 2. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-13, BY BRIAN BONA, TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF Al�i AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION TO CONNECT THE EXISTING GAS STATION AND SERVICE STATION, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5333 AND �311 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. (WARD 1). Dr. William Burns, City Nlanager, said this request allowed the construction of a new building that connected the gas station and the service garage. Petitioner was going to initially build a car wash, but that project was abandoned. The Planning Commission approved this request at their meeting on September 17, 2003. Staff recommended Council's approval with five stipulations. APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-13, BY BRIAN BONA, WITH THE FOLLOWING FIVE STIPULATIONS: 1. THE PETITIONER SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION; 2. THE PROPOSED ADDITIONS SHALL BE ARCHITECTURALLY CONIPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING BUILDING AND FINISHED WITH COMPLEMENTARY BUILDING MATERIALS. STAFF TO REVIEW AND APPROVE FINAL ELEVATIONS; 3. NO OUTDOOR STORAGE SHALL BE PERMITTED ON SITE. ALL EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE, INCLUDING THE STORAGE POD, SHALL BE REMOVED UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSED EXPANSION; 4. SITE SHALL NOT BE USED TO DISPLAY CARS FOR SALE OR STORAGE OF TRUCKS FOR RENT; AND 5. ALL LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED, DOWNCAST AND MAY NOT EXCEED 3-FOOT CANDLES OF LIGHT INTENSITY AT THE PROPERTY LINE. 3. PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST, PS #03-05, BY THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, TO ALLOW THE EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY IN ORDER TO CORRECT AN ENCROACHMENT ON CITY-OWNED LAND, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1419 WEST DANUBE ROAD AND FARR LAKE PARK (WARD 2). Dr. William Burns, City Manager, stated that the owners of the property, Mr. and Mrs. Klein, inadvertently constructed a swimming pool in their yard that encroached on a small portion of Farr Lake Park. Since the City had an easement for a trail over a similar sized portion of the Klein's property, staff proposed that the City and Mr. and Mrs. Klein exchange the two areas. The Planning Commission approved this request at their meeting on September 17, 2003. Staff recommended Council's approval. APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST, PS #03-05. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 PAGE 3 4. APPROVE AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A FINAL PLAT, PS #03-02, BY JEFFREY CRUZ, TO DIVIDE THREE PARCELS INTO EIGHT SINGLE FA�VIILY LOTS, GENER�-�LLY LOCATED AT 1540 RICE CREEK ROAD N.E. (WARD 2). Dr. William Burns, City �lanager, stated that Mr. Cruz, the owner of Meadovwiew Homes and the property located at 1540 Rice Creek Road requested an extension to the time limit for final plat approval. Due to a nearly three-month delay in the plat review process at Anoka County, N1r. Cruz would not have access to the final plat mylars within the required siY-month time line. Staff recommended that Council extend the time for approval of the final plat until March 29, 2004. GRANTED AN EXTENSION OF TIME UNTIL MARCH 29, 2004, TO APPROVE A FINAL PLAT, PS #03-02. 5. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 TO THE 2003 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2003 —1. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said that staff requested Council's approval of a change order in the amount of $6,347.55; payable to Hardrives, Inc., for additional retaining wall work on Pierce Street. T`he change order would raise the total project cost to $764,339.96. Staff recommended Council's approval. APPROVED CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 FOR THE 2043 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2003 — 1, IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,347.55, TO HARDRIVES, INC. 6. RESOLUTION NO. 47-2003 PROVIDING FOR SEWER RATE INCREASES. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, stated that the City had experienced an operating deficit for the last two yeazs. Staff recommended that Council raise the sewer rates by 1.8 percent or by .04 per thousand gallons of water usage, effective January 1, 2004. This would cost the average water user .24 per month. He said that while it was the maximum allowed by the City Charter, it would not eliminate the operating deficit. Staff recommended Council's approval. - ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 47-2003. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 48-2003 PROVIDING FOR A STORM WATER DRAINAGE RATE CHANGE. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, stated that staff recommended that the City's quarterly storm water utility rate be raised by 1.8 percent effective January 1, 2004. The increase would raise the fee for residential homeowners from $3.02 per quarter to $3.07 per quarter. Staff recommended Council's approvaL ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 48-2003. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 PAGE 4 8. RESOLtiTION NO. 49-2003 PROVIDING FOR WATER RATE CHANGE. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, stated that the water fund had also been running with an operating deficit for the past two years. Staff recommended an increase of 1.8 percent in water rates beginning January l, 2004. This would increase the cost per month for the average water user who uses 6,000 per gallons a month from $6.48 to $6.60. The increase would not eliminate the operating deficit, but was the maximum amount allowed by the City Charter. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 49-2003. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 50-2003 DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2003 -1. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 50-2003. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 51-2003 DIRECTING PUBLICATION OF THE HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT - NO. ST. 2003 —1. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 51-2003. 11. CLAIMS. AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 113335 THROUGH 113602. 12. LICENSES. APPROVED LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. 13. ESTIMATES. Hardrives Inc. 14475 Quiram Drive Rogers, NIN 55374-9461 2003 Street Improvement Marian Hills Project No. ST 2003 —1 EstimateNo. 4 ...................................................................... $ 82,723.60 � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 PAGE 5 Midwest Asphalt Corp. 5929 Baker Road, Suite 420 Minnetonka, NIN 5534� Hickory Drive Watermain Replacement Project No. 3�0 Estimate No. 3 ...................................................................... $ 38,499.23 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: Cotulcilmember Barnette asked if there would be construction on the property located at 1540 Rice Creek Road before next spring. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said that was his understanding. Councilmember Bolkcom asked to remove Item 5 to the regular agenda. Councilmember Billings said he had questions on Items 2 and 3. With respect to Item 2, he noticed there was not a stipulation that required that the two properties become one tax parcel. - Mr. Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said they discussed this with petitioner, and as the building was joined it would become one tax parcel. 0 Councilmember Billings said that with respect to Item 3, the wording said the petition was made by the City of Fridley. He asked who was paying the costs. Mr. Burns said the property owner, not the City, would pay the costs. Councilmember Bolkcom asked who would maintain the retaining walls after the project in Item No. 5 was completed. Mr. Burns said it was policy that the property owners would maintain the retaining walls. Mayor Lund asked if anyone in the audience had a question about any of the consent agenda items. - _ Ms. Nancy Jorgenson, 5730 Polk Street N.E., asked if the City received $6,000,000 for the Commons Park GAC plant. Dr. Burns said it was for the carbon-activated filter plant and that project was not done. It was included in the budget in anticipation of federal funding, which the City did not receive. Ms. Jorgenson asked if in 2001 and 2002 or one of those years, the water, storm sewer, sanitary sewer or recycling fees were increased to the maximum allowed by the Charter amendment. Dr. Burns said they probably were. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 PAGE 6 No other persons in the audience spoke regarding the consent agenda items. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the consent agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: Councilmember Bolkcom asked to add a public hearing for a Local Law Enforcement Block Grant as Item 1 �A. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the agenda with the addition of Item 14A. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM: Ms. Martha Reckdahl, 7823 Alden Way N.E., invited everyone to attend Pumpkin Night in the Park, a non-violent Halloween event that would be held at the Springbrook Nature Center on Saturday, October 25, 2003, from 6:00 to 10:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 14. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUING AN ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE TO GEORGE MICHAEL SCHRAUTH FOR GMME DOUGH, INC., DB/A BROADWAY BAR & PIZZA, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 8298 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. (WARD 3). MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. Mr. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, said the hearing was for an on-sale into�cating liquor license for Broadway Bar & Pizza which would be located at 8298 University Avenue N,E. The license would actually be issued to GMME Dough, Inc., which was doing business as Broadway Bar & Pizza. The building was leased to Mr. George M. Schrauth. The Public Safety Department conducted a review and found no reason to deny the request. Petitioner had been working the with the City's Building Inspection Division to remodel the restaurant and planned on opening the restaurant on November 1. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Sun 0 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 PAGE 7 Focus on September 18. Final approval of the license was scheduled for the October 13, 2003, Council meeting. Councilmember Barnette asked if the building was being leased from the same person who owned the building �vhen Sean's was there. Mr. Pribyl said it was. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they understood the liquor to food ratio. Mr. Schrauth said they had a very good understanding. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about code-related issues at the building. Mr. Schrauth said the lower door opening from the building to the parking lot was replaced. Councilmember Billings asked if Mr. Schrauth was a franchisee and if GMME Dough, Inc., had more than one operation. Mr. Schrauth said he did not run any other franchises and did not own franchise rights to sell to - other people. He stated that he did not have any interest in any other Broadway Pizzas. GMME Dough was created for this franchise and the letters represented the initials from his and his wife's names. Councilmember Billings asked him about the restaurant. Mr. Schrauth said it would be primarily a restaurant. He said there was a lower level in the building that was designed for banquet space. He said he did not request an entertainment license. Should the banquet business prove to be more successful if they allowed wedding parties, he might pursue that, but they did not have any plans at this time. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 14A. CONSIDERATION OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 PAGE 8 Ms. Myra Harris, Public Safety Projects Coordinator, said the 2003 Loca1 Law Enforcement Block Grant was cut nationally by 25 percent. Accordingly, the City would receive $13,419 with a match of $1,491. She said they wanted to use the money and buy software that would put their record system automatically onto a map every 24 hours. That would give them the ability to recognize crimes and patterns in certain areas of the City. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the advisory board had approved the use of the funds. Ms. Harris said they had. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 15. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS. Dr. Burns, City Manager, said the latest issue of the newsletter should be delivered around October 10. Dr. Burns said that after the Council meeting, staff would like to discuss a lease agreement Anoka County is proposing with the Minnesota Parks and Recreation Association for the Islands of Peace recreation building. Mayor Lund issued an invitation to the Fire Department's open house on October 4 and to Pumpkin Night in the Park at the Springbrook Nature Center on October 25. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE THE MAYOR DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:20 P.M. Respectfuily submitted, Roberta S. Collins Scott J. Lund Secretary Mayor CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 1, 2003 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the October 1, 2003, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Diane Savage, Dave Kondrick, Dean Saba, Barb Jones, Brad Dunham Larry Kuechle, Leroy Oquist Stacy Stromberg, Planner Dan & Diane Seekamp, 7055 East River Road MpTION made by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. �, pUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special e se ene ally oca ed at 05DEa t R ver Road NE secon accessory structure (garag ), g MO_ made by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Saba, to open the public hearing. CHAIRP PUBO C H ARING OPENE AT UPON A VON CARR ED UNANIMOUSLYEAND THE THE MOTIO 7:31 P.M. Ms. Stacy Stromberg, Planner, stated the petitioner, Mr. Seeka bpildin e n the'rear ya d'of h se permit to a l low t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a 4 8 0 s q u a re foot accessory 9 p r o p e r t y. T h e b uildin g will be used for vehicle and boat parking, as we l l as s t o r a g e o f a lawnmower and other yard equipment. Ms. Stromberg stated accessory structures over 240 SS 459 s eua er fee tand t e proposed se in the R-1 zoning dis tric t. T h e e x i s t i n g t w o s t a l l g a r a g e q accessory structure is 480 square feet. The total sqarerfeet, wh ch is 461 square fee g ess h an proposed accessory s t r u c t u r e a r e a t o t a l o f 9 3 9 s q the total allowed by Code. The proposed garage location meets all setbac k an d l o t c o v e r a g e requirements. Ms. Stromberg stated City staff has not received any comments from neighboring property owners. 1 Commission Meetin October 1, 2003 2 Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit with stipulations as second accessory structures are permitted under special use permit in the R-1 Single Famify District. If the Commission recommends approval of the special use permit, staff recommends the fo�lowing stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall install a code-required hard surface driveway within 12 months of the issuance of a building permit. 2. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 3. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with comptementary siding and color scheme. Mr. Dan Seekamp, the petitioner, stated he has two cars and a number of items that need to be stored inside such as a lawnmower, wheelbarrow, etc. He would not like to have these items stored outside, so that is the reason for this request for a second garage. Ms. Savage asked Mr. Seekamp if he was agreeable to the stipulations. Mr. Seekamp stated he had no problem with any of the stipulations. Ms. Savage asked Mr. Seekamp if he has heard any comments from his neighbors. Mr. Seekamp stated he has told the three surrounding neighbors about his proposal, and they didn't indicate any problems. Mr. Kondrick asked approximately how far the garage would be from the house. Mr. Seekamp stated about 50 feet. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:40 P.M. Mr. Kondrick stated the petitioner has a very deep lot, and he did not see any problem with approving this special use permit request. The other Commission members agreed with Mr. Kondrick. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Saba, to recommend approval of the request for Special Use Permit, SP #03-15, by Daniel Seekamp for a second accessory structure (garage), generally located at 7055 East River Road NE: 1. The petitioner shall install a code-required hard surFace driveway within 12 months of the issuance of a building permit. 2. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 3. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary siding and color scheme. 2 Planning Commission Meeting October 1 2003 Page 3 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTtON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Savage said this special use permit will be heard on October 13, 2003, by the City Council. 2. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 4, 2003. PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING MOTION made by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the August 4, 2003, Parks & Recreation Commission minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOT10N CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 10. 2003, APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING _ MOTION made by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the September 10, 2003, Appeals Commission minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 16. 2003. EN_VIRONMENTAL QUALITY & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING MOTION made by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to receive the September 16, 2003, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE OCTOBER 1, 2003, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:45 P.M. Res ectfully submitt d, � L e Saba R cording Secretary 3 � a C7TY OF FRIDLEY _ AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 Date: October 7, 2003 _ / `J�/ To: William Burns, City Manager�� From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Special Use Permit Request, SP #03-15, Dan Seekamp M-03-148 INTRODUCTION The petitioner, Mr. Seekamp, is seeking a special use permit to allow the construction of a 480 square foot accessory building in the rear yard of his property. The building will be used for vehicle and boat parking, as well as storage of a lawnmower and other yard equipment. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the October 1, 2003, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for SP #03-15. After a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of special use permit, SP #03-15, with the stipulations as presented. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMNEDATION City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. STIPULATIONS 1. Petitioner shall install code required hard surface driveway within 12 months of issuance of a building permit. 2. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 3. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with a complementary siding and color scheme. � City of Fridley Land Use Application SP #03-15 September 16, 2003 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Daniei Seekamp 7055 East River Road Fridley MN 55432 Requested Action: Special Use Permit to allow a second accessory structure over 240 square feet. Existing Zoning: R-1 (Single Family Residential) - Location: 7055 East River Road Size: 23,875 sq. ft. .55 acres Existing Land Use: Single family home. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family & R-1 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Single Family & R-1 W: Single Family & R-1 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Sec. 205.07.1.C.(1) requires a special use permit to allow accessory buildings other than the first accessory buildinq, over 240 square feet. Zoning History: 1953 — Home & Garage built. 1958 — Home Addition. Legal Description of Property: Part of Camp Howard & Hush's Addtion (Torrens) Public Utilities: Home is connected. Transportation: East River Road provides access to the residence. Physical Characteristics: Typical suburban landscapinq. SUMMARY OF PROJECT The petitioner, Mr. Seekamp, is seeking a special use permit to allow the construction of a 480 square foot accessory building in the rear yard of his property. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit, with stipulations. Second accessory buildings over 240 square feet are a permitted special use in the R-1 zoning district, provided the total square footage of all accessory buildings doesn't exceed 1,400 square feet. The current two- stall garage is 459 square feet and the proposed accessory structure is 480 square feet. The total of all accessory buildings, existinq and proposed is 939 square feet. CITY COUNCIL ACTION/ 60 DAY DATE City Council — October 13, 2003 60 Day — October 27, 2003 (Existing Home) Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin SP #03-15 REQUEST The petitioner, Mr. Seekamp, is seeking a special use permit to allow the construction of a 480 square foot accessory building in the rear yard of his property. The building will be used for vehicie and boat parking, as well as storage of a lawnmower and other yard equipment. ANALYSIS The property is located on and the home is "squared up" to and fronting on East River Road. The dimensions of the lot are 75 feet by 300+ feet and it is a rectangular shape. The existing home and garage were built in 1953. An addition was added to the home in 1958. Existing home Accessory structures over 240 square feet are a permitted special use in the R-1 zoning district. The existing two-stall garage is 459 square feet and the proposed accessory structure is 480 square feet. The total square footage of the existing garage and the proposed accessory structure are a total of 939 square feet, which is 461 square feet less than the total allowed by Code. City staff has not received any comments from neighboring property owners. � Proposed Garage Location RECOMMENDATIONS City Statf recommends approval as second accessory sfructures are permitted under speciai use permit in the R-1 Single Family District. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached. 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. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary siding and color scheme. � � a CifY OF FRIDLEY Date To AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 October 8, 2003 William Burns, City Manager � � From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Variance Request, VAR #03-16, Bob's Produce Ranch, 7620 University Avenue M-03-136 INTRODUCTION AND APPEALS COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Bob's Produce original sign variance request was to increase the size of a free standing sign from 80 square feet to 120 square feet and to reduce the setback of a free-standing sign from 10 feet to 2 feet from a property line and from 10 feet to 0 feet from a driveway. As you will recall, at the September 10, 2003, Appeals Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for VAR #03-16. After much discussion, the Appeals Commission recommended denial of the variance request to increase the maximum size of a freestanding size from 80 square feet to 120 square feet. THE MOTION CARRIED UNAMIOUSLY. The variance request to reduce the setback of a freestanding sign from a property line from 10 feet to 2 and from a driveway from 10 feet to 0 feet was aCso denied. THE MOTION CARRIED BY A 3 TO 2 VOTE. OUTCOME AFTER APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING After the Appeals Commission meeting on September 10, 2003, City Staff contacted the petitioner regarding an option that would eliminate the need for such an extensive setback variance, please see attached drawing in your packet. This option would involve removing a parking stall and redesigning the driveway and turf/planted area, to make additional room for the pylon sign. The petitioner has decided against this option as it isn't cost effective for them and they don't want to reduce the size of their driveway. The petitioner has submitted plans for a new 2-sided sign that will meet the 80 square foot n �•� sign code requirement. Therefore, eliminating the size variance. The petitioner has also submitted a new site plan, which shows the proposed location of the new 80 square foot sign. The petitioner is still proposing to locate it in the turf/planted area in the northeast corner of the property. The original request was to reduce the setback of the sign from 10 feet to 2 feet from a property line and from 10 feet to 0 feet from a driveway. The new site plans show that the proposed 2-sided sign will be 5 feet from a property line and 4 feet from the driveway. Therefore, the petitioner would still be requesting a sign setback variance from 10 feet to 5 feet from a property line and from 10 feet to 4 feet from a driveway. STAFF RECOMMENDATION City staff recommends approval of both setback variance requests, with stipulations. • The proposed sign size and Iocation has been redesigned to not require such an extensive variance request. • The proposed sign location is the only place on this site that would provide visibility. • The proposed sign location wouldn't require a reduction in parking stalls or drive aisle width. STIPULATIONS 1. All the temporary signs located on the property shall be removed immediately and this property shall be subject to the sign code standards for temporary signs. 2. Sign to be reduced to a 2-sided sign to comply with cuRent sign code requirements. 3. No additional pylon signs are allowed on this site. 4. The City is relieved from all liability caused by the sign being located in its proposed position, only 5 feet from the property line and 4 feet from a driveway. 5. This variance shall remain in effect unless any of the following occur: A. The sign is altered in any way, except for routine maintenance and change of messages which makes the sign less in compliance with requirements. B. The supporting structure of the sign is replaced or remodeled. C. The face of the sign is replaced or remodeled. D. The sign becomes dilapidated or damaged and the cost of bringing it into compliance is more than 50% of the value of the sign, at which time all of the sign and its structure shall be removed. E. Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) above, upon the change of the name of the business being displayed on this sign. �� CITY OF FRlDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 10, 2003 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Kuechle called the September 10, 2003 Appeals Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROIL CALL: Members Present: Larry Kuechle, Ken Vos, Sue Jackson, Blaine Jones, Gary Zinter Members Absent: None Others Present: Stacy Stromberg, Planner Jim & Jennifer Swedberg, 7500 Lakeside Rd NE Ben Kasper, 7501 Lakeside Rd NE Jim Maki, 7520 Lakeside Rd NE Mike Schroer, 7620 University Ave NE 1. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #03,16, BY � w ��i+� t. I. Per Section 214.11.02B of the Fridley Sign Code, to increase the maximum size of freestanding sign from 80 square feet to 120 square feet. 2. Per Section 214.11.02.E of the Fridley Sign Code, to reduce the setback of a freestanding sign from a property line from 10 feet to 2 feet. 3. Per Section 214.11.02.E of the Fridley Sign Code, to reduce the setback of a freestanding sign from a driveway from10 feet to 0 feet. To allow the relocation of theexisting sign on Lot 1, Block 1, East Ranch Estates 1$` Addition, subject to easement of record, generally located at 7620 University Avenue NE. MOTION by Mr. Jones, seconded by Mr. Zinter, to open the public hearing and waive the full reading of the public notice. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:32. Ms. Stacy Stromberg, Planner, stated the petitioner, Bob's Produce, is requesting a variance to increase the size of a free-standing sign from 80 square feet to 120 square feet and to reduce the setback of a freestanding sign from 10 feet to 2 feet from a property line and from 10 feet to 0 feet from a driveway. The petitioner plans to use his existing 3-sided Bob's Produce sign and is proposing to relocate it to the turf/planted area in the northeast corner of the property. The Bob's Produce sign panels will remain the same, and the petitioner plans to add an electronic readerboard sign on the bottom of the sign which is currently blank. The existing pylon sign was granted a variance in 1992 to increase the size of a free-standing sign from 80 square feet to 120 square feet. A stipulation placed on the 1992 variance stated that the variance will only remain as long as the sign isn't altered in any way; therefore, the petitioner is requesting the current variance. 10 September 10, 2003 Appeals Commission Meeting P� 2 Ms. Stromberg stated the summary of the hardship that was submitted by the petitioner reads: "With the new development in front of our business and that our property has frontage on University Avenue and Osborne Road we would like the City to consider allowing us to move our existing sign to a new location for more visibility to the heavily traveled University Avenue." Ms. Stromberg stated the property is zoned C-2, General Business as are all surrounding properties. It is located on Osborne Road, west of University Avenue. The original building was constructed in 1969. This property has never complied with the 80- square foot sign code requirement, but has been granted variances since the property was developed. In August 1972, the City Council granted a variance for a pylon sign to increase the maximum area to 276 square feet and to also increase the height of the sign from 25 feet to 28%z feet. In 1984, the City Council granted a special use permit to allow an automatic changeable readerboard sign. In 1992, the City Council granted a variance to allow the size of a pylon sign to be increased from 80 square feet to 120 square feet. This variance was granted to allow the installation of one sign for the entire development of Bob's Produce Ranch and Lyndale Garden Center, instead of each business having its own 80 square foot pylon sign. Further, three-sided signs are not allowed by code as each property is allowed one 80 square foot pylon side, with two sides. When you add an additional side, the two faces are no longer back-to-back, but are considered three separate signs. Ms. Stromberg stated Section 214.11.2.6 of the City Code allows the maximum size of a pylon sign to be 80 square feet in area. The petitioner is requesting a variance to increase the size to 120 square feet. Seetion 214.11.2.E of the City Code requires that a pylon sign be set back a minimum of 10 feet from all property lines and driveways. The petitioner is proposing to place a sign a minimum of 2 feet from the property line and 0 feet from a driveway. Ms. Stromberg stated that before the Commission shall grant a variance, it is the responsibility of the petitioner to meet the four conditions required to be met in Section 214.11.02 of the City Sign Code. None of the four conditions required have been met by the petitioner. Therefore, by Code, the sign variance should not be granted. The four conditions required for a sign variance are: A . That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and district. The circumstances suROUnding the location of this properly are neither exceptional nor extraordinary to allow a sign larger than the Code requires. The property has good visibility from University Avenue as well as Osborne Road. The property is not unique when compared to neighboring properties or other similar zoned properties within Fridley. Dunn Bros Coffee, a multi-tenant building to the east, has one 80 square foot sign for three tenants; and the Mike's Discount Foods, a multi-tenant building located to the south, has one 80 square foot sign for two businesses in its multi-tenant building. The Dunn Bros building is owned by the petitioner; and at the time it was constructed, the petitioner had control of the design of the building. If the Bob's Produce building is blocked, the hardship was self-imposed. Other pylon signs located near this viciniry in Fridley 11 September 10, 2003 Appeals Commission Meeting Page 3 do not exceed the 80 square foot requirement and also meet the required setbacks. B. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and district, but which is denied the property in question. Larger than code signs are not a property right possessed by other properties within the same vicinity. Denying the variances for the excessive size of the signage does not eliminate the opportunity for signage on the property. The petitioner has the opportunity to combine a new 80-square foot sign with an increase in wall signage to capitalize on visibility from both University Avenue and Osborne Road. There is also an option of utilizing a roof top sign versus a pyfon sign. The petitioner has many options for complying with setback requirements. The proposed location would always require a variance regardless of size; however, the existing location meets setback requirements as well as the entire landscaped area along the eastern edge of the property. Complying with the setback is simply a matter of locating the sign afong the eastem edge of the property. C. That the strict application would constitute an unnecessary hardship. City staff has not been able to identify any hardship for the size or setback requests. Strict application of the code would require reducing the sign to 80 square feet and locating the sign 10 feet from any property line or installing a roof top sign. The petitioner is no longer sharing the sign with another user, so the entire 80 square feet could be used to advertise his business. Variances granted in the past were due to two users occupying the site. This is no longer the case. There are alternatives to the proposed location, which would meet all setback requirements. D. That granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or detrimental to the properties in the vicinity or district in which the property is located. The purpose of the sign code requirements is to reduce the size and amount of signage allowed on a property in order to reduce the visual pollution and distractions for the motoring public. Moving the existing sign to the proposed location with its current size of 120 square feet and the addition of an electronic readerboard would be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the motoring public. The size and close proximity to the right-of-way would be a distraction to the motoring public. The sign would also dominate the landscape due to the sign's extreme size and setback from the public right-of-way. Recent sign variances along University Avenue have been denied. These variances include the Freedom Station at University & Osbome (size), the Fridley Business Plaza at 7190 University Avenue (setback), and the Texaco Station at University & 73`d Avenue (setback). The only other variance granted besides the Bob's 1992 variance, which was granted to combine and reduce the allowable square footage of two separate business on two separate parcels from 160 square feet to 120 square feet, was granted to Bachmans to increase the size of a free- standing pylon sign to 120 square feet. Backmans owns an undeveloped 2-acre lot located in front of their building, and they were granted the variance by giving 12 September 10, 2003 Appeals Commission Meedng Page 4 up a second sign for the undeveloped two-acre lot and combining the signs for the two lots into a 120 square foot sign. This 120 square foot sign approval required that a covenant be placed on the undeveloped lot preventing the installation of a free-standing sign on that lot once it was developed. Ms. Stromberg stated Ciry staff recommends denial of the variance request as the petitioner has no statutory defined hardship, no comparable variances have been granted over the past five years, and complying with the setback is simply a matter of keeping the sign in the existing location or moving it to the landscaped area along the eastern property line. Staff recommends that if any of the variances are granted, the following stipulations be attached: 1. All the temporary signs located on the property shall be removed immediately and this property shall be subject to the sign code standards for temporary signs. 2. The sign shall be reduced to a two-sided sign to comply with current sign code requirements. 3. No additional pylons signs are allowed on this site. 4. The City is relieved from all liability caused by the sign being located in its proposed position, only 2 feet from the property line and zero feet from a driveway. 5. This variance shall remain in effect unless any of the following occur: (a) The sign is altered in any way, except for routine maintenance and change of inessages which makes the sign less in compliance with requirements. (b) The supporting structure of the sign is replaced or remodeled. (c) The face of the sign is replaced or remodeled. (d) The sign becomes dilapidated or damaged and the cost of bringing it into compliance is more than 50% of the value of the sign, at which time all of the sign and its structure shall be removed, (e) Notwithstanding subparagraph (a) above, upon the change of the name of the business being displayed on this sign. Dr. Vos asked if the sign is 120 square feet in its present location. Ms. Stromberg stated that is correct. Mr. Kuechle asked Ms. Stromberg where the sign could be placed legally. Ms. Stromberg stated it could be placed legally all along the eastern edge of the property as long as it meets setbacks. Dr. Vos asked if the sign would be in compliance if itwas located on the island. Ms. Stromberg stated that it would not be in compliance, because it would be only 2 feet from the property line or zero feet from a driveway. If Bob's Produce had a two-sided sign facing east and west, it would present an overhang problem into the driveway. The pole in front of Dunn Bros is angled; therefore it doesn't go over the property line. Bob's Produce could look at doing something like that here, but again they would need a variance because they would be close to a driveway. The Codes says they need to be 10 feet from a driveway as well as the property line. 13 September 10, 2003 Appeals Commission MeeOng Page 5 Dr. Vos commented that 8ob's Produce needs a variance if they move the 120 square fooY sign, and a variance to keep the sign at 120 square feeY. The only thing to satisfy is the two requests about the setbacks. Anytime they move the sign, they have to come in for a variance. Mr. Kueckle stated that as a point of clarification, they could keep the sign in the same location that they now have. Ms. Stromberg stated that is correct. Without any alterations, the sign can stay in its current location and at its current state. Mr. Jones asked if they leased it to a tenant, could they keep the sign and make a change and put the tenant's name on the sign? Ms. Stromberg stated, yes, if the sign is kept in the current location. All they would do is take out the blank panel below Bob's Produce and put in a new panel. The petitioner Mike Schroer, Bob's Produce Ranch, 7620 University Avenue, stated this is a tough location. There are other options, like along the median, but it is not visible because of the building there. Bob's Produce did put the building there, but certainly it is better to have a building there instead of an empty lot. The building creates revenue. The requested location fits well, because it will line up with other signs along University Avenue. The sign would have better visibility along Universiry Avenue. He believed the requested location is the best place to see the sign; it should have been placed there before. Mr. Schroer stated Bob's Produce has been talking about a three-sided sign; however, Bob's Produce would utilize two sides instead of three. Bob's Produce would like to have an electronic readerboard, instead of the °handwritten signs." There was an option of putting it on the roof, but that would make the sign about three times the size of the current sign, and the cost is extraordinary. That option is not practical. Bob's Produce cannot do anything along the south side of the road, along Osborne road, because of water pipe issues. The sign is as far south as it can go. The intent is to clean the sign up and have a readerboard. Ms. Jackson asked if Bob's Produce would be allowed to put up a readerboard and leave the sign in its current location, and would the petitioner be interested in doing that? Mr. Schroer stated, yes, but it would be more expensive. They considered doing that, but thought if they did that, they might as well put it in a better location that fits the site better, which is along University Avenue. It is seen a lot better along University rather than along Osborne Road. The intent is to capture the traffic on University Avenue. Mr. Jones asked if the petitioner looked at putting it on the other side of the driveway from there and did the petitioner know the setback requirements? Mr. Schroer said that it could be placed there, but it would be back further and somewhat behind the building. Mr. Jones stated that the sign would be close to a parking lot, and there might be issues with that also. 14 September 10, 2003 Appeals Commission Meeting P� 6 Mr. Schroer stated the other signs along University Avenue are all in front, and this sign would be back about 25-30 feet off line with the rest of the signs on University. There are other options like putting it on the Dunn Bros property; but there are other things that have to done to do that, and that seemed a little more cumbersome than this requested location. There are harder and more complicated issues that would have to be addressed if it were placed on the Dunn Bros p�operty. Ms. Stromberg indicated that if they decided to locate the sign on the Dunn Bros site, they would need a variance to allow more than one pylon sign on a parcel. They would also need a special use permit for an electronic readerboard sign. They already have the special use permit on their site. Depending on where the sign would be located, there may be setback issues also. Dr. Vos stated they already have a special use permit; but if they move to another parcel, they will have to get a special use permit for that parcel. Ms. Stromberg said that is correct. Mr. Jones commented that if they located it to another parcel, they would have to give up their pylon sign for the present parcel. Ms. Stromberg said that would be something staff would have to look at, but that would probably be true. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Jones, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:07 PM. Mr. Kuechle stated that the requests should be considered separately. Mr. Zinter stated the City is trying to enforce the sign codes, and he is not in favor of increasing the size of the sign. Mr. Kuechle agreed. He stated there is no hardship in terms of making it justifiable from an 80 square foot sign to a 120 square foot sign. There could be a danger of setting a precedence by granting an increase in square footage without a clear and unique hardship. He stated he cannot support this variance. Mr. Jones stated that he could see going from 80s square feet to 120 square feet if the sign is shared by two businesses, but the Commission hasn't granted anybody a sign variance and there have been a lot of businesses that have the same issue. Going from an 80 square foot sign to a 120 square foot sign is changing the sign code. Mr. Jones said that his philosophy on this request is just leave it alone. He would recommend denial of all the requests. He sees no advantage in increasing the sign size or moving the sign. Ms. Jackson said that the petitioner is fortunate to have a 120 square foot sign where it is. 15 September 10, 2003 Appeals Commission Meeting p� 7 MOTION by Mr. Zinter, seconded by Mr. Jones, to recommend deniai of variance request, VAR #03-16, by Bob's Produce Ranch to increase the maximum size of freestanding sign from 80 square feet to 120 square feet. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Jackson stated there are other places where the sign could be placed to meet the setback requirements. If visibility from University Avenue is important, the petitioner could work with staff on the idea of using the Dunn Bros site in lieu of the current location. Since there are locations that meet the code, she would vote against the setback requests. Dr. Vos stated he did not see the hardship of moving the sign to the requested site. There are other locations where the sign could be placed. Mr. Kuechle stated he would be more inclined to grant the variance request for the setbacks. He said his biggest concern was whether the sign can be placed there safely from traffic. Is there any danger to traffic? The site is somewhat unique in the fact that the road curves to the west, so if you look at the profile of signs going north and south, Bob's Produce's sign would be further off University Avenue than many of the typical signs would be. Therefore, there are some grounds to grant the setback variance requests. However, his concern would be whether the sign could be located at that location safely. If it could be done safely, he would be in favor of granting the setback variances. Dr. Vos stated he had the same opinion as Mr. Kuechle, and he was also concemed about safety. If the safety issue could be answered, he would not have a problem with the sign's location. Putting the building there was the best decision Bob's Produce made at the time, and was better than leaving the parcel vacant. He would vote for the setback variances if the safery issue could be answered. Mr. Zinter stated the safety issue is a concern. He believed snowplowing and cars sliding could be a problem; therefore, he would recommend denial of the setback variance requests. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Jackson, to recommend denial of variance request, VAR #03-16, by Bob's Produce Ranch to reduce the setback of a freestanding sign from a property line from 10 feet to 2 feet and to reduce the setback of a freestanding sign from a driveway from10 feet to 0 feet. UPON A VOICE VOTE, VOS, JACKSON, � ZINTER VOTING AYE, JONES AND KUECHLE VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A VOTE OF 3-2. LL•J � AGENDA lTEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 CfTY OF FRIDLEY DATE: October 10, 2003 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �� FROM: Scott J. Hickok, Community Development Director Grant E. Fernelius, Assistant HRA Director SUBJECT: Consider Resolution Calling for Public Hearing on December 8, 2003 Regarding Amendments to Tax Increment Financing Plan Introduction On Monday evening, the City Council will be asked to adopt the attached resolution, which calls for a public hearing to be held on December 8, 2003 regarding proposed amendments to the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) program. The amendments involve modifications to the Redevelopment Plan for Project No. 1 and the TIF plan budgets for several of the tax increment districts. In essence, the TIF plan budgets need to be updated to reflect new revenue and expense projections. For example, in 2001 the State Legislature reduced class rates, which had a dramatic affect on ta�c increment revenues (about a 40% reduction). During the last session, the Legislature changed the method for calculating increment in pre-1988 districts (the City has 3 of these districts.) Although, this is more of an administrative action, state law requires that the City Council and HRA conduct a public hearing before amending the TIF plan budgets. Additional information will be presented to the Council at the public hearing on December gth Modification Process There are several steps in order to amend the TIF Plan and accompanying budgets. A copy of the proposed chronology is attached. Because of the notice requirements, the call for a public hearing must be made on October 13th. The Fridley HRA will consider the program modifications at their December 4, 2003 meeting. Once the hearing is held on December 8, 2003, the Council will be asked to consider approval of the modifications at the December 15, 2003 meeting. 17 TIF Plan Memo October 10, 2003 Page 2 Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached the resolution calling for a public hearing on December 8, 2003 regarding amendments to the City's Redevelopment Plan for Project Na 1 and tax increment financing plans. M-03-151 : RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTlON CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MODlFICATION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 17 TO REFLECT INCREASED PROJECT COSTS AND INCREASED BONDING AUTHORITY WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Public Hearinq. 1.01. This Council shall meet on Monday, December 8, 2003, commencing at 7:30 o'clock p.m. at City Hall, 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, to hold a public hearing on the following matters: (a) the modification of the Redevelopment Plan for Redeve�opment Project No. 1 to reflect increased project costs and increased bonding authority, pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive, as amended and supplemented from time to time; and, (b) the modification of the Tax fncrement Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 and 17 to reflect increased project costs and increased bonding authority within Redevelopment Project No. 1, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174 through 469.1799, inclusive, as amended and supplemented from time to time. Section 2. Notice of Hearing: Filing of Plans. 2.01. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause notice of the public hearing, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, to be published as required by law, to place a copy of the modified Redevelopment Plan and modified Tax Increment Financing Plans (collectively the "Plans") on file in the City Clerk's office and to make such Plans available for inspection by the public. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY THIS 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2003. ATTEST: DEBRA SKOGEN - CITY CLERK SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR 19 Page 2 - Resolution No. CERTIFICATION I, Debra Skogen, the duly qualified Clerk of the City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. passed by the City Council on the 13th day of October, 2003. DEBRA SKOGEN - CITY CLERK G:\WPDATA\6lFRIDLEY�60\T'IF�RESOLUTION C.4L.LING HEARING.DOC 20 EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF FRIDLEY COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, will hold a public hearing on Monday, December 8, 2003, at 7:30 o'clock p.m., to be held at the Fridley City Hall, 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, relating to the approval and adoption of a modified Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 to reflect increased project costs and increased bonding authority, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, inclusive. The hearing is also relative to the approval and adoption of modified Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 to reflect increased project costs and increased bonding authority within Redevelopment Project No. 1, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, inclusive. Copies of the documentation relating to the above proposed actions will be on file and available for public inspection in the office of the City Clerk. All interested persons may appear at the hearing and present their views orally or in writing. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ City Manager 21 CfTY OF FRIDLEY PROPOSED CHRONOLOGY MOOIFICATION OF REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 37 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MONDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2003 TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2003 TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2003 WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2003 WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2003 THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2003 WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2003 THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2003 THURSDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2003 MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2003 MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2003 3: \%�?DA:A\.°\`'�:DL�'L\50\,:= \�3:�ONC;.CGY.DCC CITY COUNCIL MEETING Adopt resolution calling for public hearing NOTICE PROVIDED TO COUNTY COMMlSSIONER (not less than 30 days prior to publication of Notice of Pubiic Hearing) NOTiCE PROVIDED TO SCHOOL DlSTRICT(S) AND ANOKA COUNTY (not less than 30 days prior to public hearing) PUBLIC HEARING NOTiCE DELIVERED FOR FIRST PUBtICATION PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE DELIVERED FOR SECOND PUBLICATION FIRST PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PUBLISHED (not less than 10 days nor more than 30 days prior to public hearing) PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING (if needed) Review geographic modification to Redevelopment Project No. 1, SECOND PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PUBLISHED (not less than 10 days nor more than 30 days prior to public hearing) HRA MEETING Review, approve and adopt proposed modifications to Redevelopment Project No. 1 and TIF Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 CITY COUNCIL MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING Review modifications to Redevelopment Project No. 1 and TI F Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 CITY COUNCIL MEETING/APPROVAL CONSIDEFtATION Review, approve and adopt proposed modifications to Redevelopment Project No. 1 and TIF Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17 22 0 0 / a CifY aF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 William W. Burns, City Manager �r„ � �� . Jon hl�aas, Public Works Director October 8, 2003 Construction Services for the University Avenue Pond Project PW03-089 WSB � Associates has been the consultant to the Springbrook Watershed Clean Water ParMership as we have evaluated different tr-eatment options and design solutions including the University Avenue pond project WSB has presented a proposal for construction services to the Springbrook Watershed Clean Water Partnership for construction administration, surveying and inspection during the University Avenue pond project in an amount not-to-exceed �14,500. We have evaluated the proposal and feel this is the best resource for these services to the project Funding is through the grants obtained by the Partnership. Recommend the City Council approve the agreement with WSB � Associates for construction services for the University Avenue pond project in an amount not-to-exceed �14,500. !11iMi� 23 / � CRY OF FRIDLEY TO: F'ROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 William W. Burns, City Manager �"�� . � �4 Jon ti. tiaukaas, Public Works Director Julie Jones, Environmental Pianner October 8, 2003 University Avenue Storm Water Treatment Pond Project I' ► • ��:�:3 0 0 The Springbrook Watershed Clean Water Partnership put together a plan to construct a storm water treatment and retention ponding area in the southeast quadrant of University Avenue (Tti 47) and 85th Avenue, upstream of the Springbrook (`lature Center as part of the overall watershed improvement grant project � Bids were opened for the project on Friday, October 3, 2003. Twelve (12) bids were received. The low bid was submitted by Park Construction of Fridley, MI`I, in the amount of �128,162.72. - This project will be funded entirely through the grants obtained by the Springbrook Watershed Clean Water Partnership. This project is being awarded by the City of Fridley as we are the lead agency of this Partnership group. Recommend the City Council receive the bids and award the contract for the University Avenue Storm Water Treatrnent Pond project to Park Construction in the amount of �128,162.72. Jt1tl:cz Attachment 24 . - .��/�� /� & Associates, Inc. �, : �` � � <� . �`��. . �� r��'��`: � � : Y� �'{� �. , � ��.��wt;. , � � �_; � ,: � r .� y�„�� :. � � g� ��. � �,� �: �Y� i `. � �� . �� : �� ,}-:..;, 4150 Olson�� .°`�`� .Memoria( Highway iuite 300 ': - Minneapolis'�;;• -ry;��, �- Minnesota '�'�- ,° � ` 55422 �., :.' ♦=?- r ' 763 •541-4$00, `. �� -' � 763 541 '1700 FAX October 6, 2003 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, l�N 5�432 Re: University Avenue Storm Water Pond City of Fridley WSB Project No. 1449-01 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Bids were received for the above-referenced project on October 3, 2003, and were opened and read aloud. A total of 12 bids were received. The bids were checked for mathematical accuracy and tabulated. Please find enclosed the bid tabulation indicating the low bidder as Park Construction Company, 500 73rd Avenue Northeast, Suite 123, Minneapolis, MN �5432 in the amount of $128,162.72. We recommend that the City Council consider these bids and award a contract to Park Construction Company based on the results of the bids received. Sincerely, WSB & Associates, InG ` c �i�� -.,�,�.,.,` Q�f Todd E. Hubmer, P.E. ` Proj ect Manager Enclosures c: sm Park Construction Company Minneapolis •�d • Equal Opportunity ErpR�IN�1449-01�recmmdtn lff.doc PROJECT: University Avenue Storm Water Pond City of Fridiey LOCATION: Fridley, MN WSB PROJECT NO.: 1449-01 Bids Opened: Friday, October 3, 2003 at 10:00 a.m. Contractor Addendums Rec'd. Bid Security Total Bid 1 Park Construction 2 Veit & Company Inc. 3 Eureka Construction 4 Don Zappa & Sons Excavating, Inc. 5 Jay Brothers, Inc. 6 Arnt Construction Company, Inc. 7 Landwehr Construction Company 8 Forest Lake Contracting, Inc. 9 Belair Excavating 10 Soil-Con Excavating & Grading 11 Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. 12 F.M. Frattalone Excavating & Grading Engineer's Opinion of Cost N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A X $128,162.72 X $186,721.40"* X $187,728.50'* X $188,982.75"" X $196,900.60** X $222,965.30 X $224,359.85 X $227,123.50 X $229,267.85'* X $233,696.08** X $259,342.40 X $297,947.75 $243,030.50 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct tabulation of the bids as received on October 3, 2003. Todd E. Hubmer, P.E., Project Manager "* Denotes corrected figure � 0 ! ` ClTY OF FRIDLEY Z'�: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 The Honarable Mayor and City Council William W. Burns, City Manager �N � October 9, 2003 2004 City Calendar _ Attached is a proposed 2004 City calendar which indicates City Council meetin�s, conferences _ and holidays. Budget work sessions were tentatively set for June 21 and October 18. Meetings with other agencies were scheduled for January 29, Apri129, July 29, and September 30. 0 0 Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution and the 2004 calendar of City Council meetings and holidays. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. WWB:rsc Attachments 27 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DESIGNATING TIlVIE Ai'�iD NUMBER OF COUNCIL NIEETINGS FOR 2004 WHEREAS, Section 3.01 of the Charter of the City of Fridley requires that the City Council meet at a fixed time not less than once each month; and WHEREAS, Section 3.01 of the Charter of the City of Fridley requires that the Council shall meet at such times as may be prescribed by resolution; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Council to comply with the open meeting provisions contained in Minnesota Statutes 471.705 as interpreted by the courts; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley that: 1. The Council will hold regular meetings in the Council Chambers of the Fridley Municipal Center, commencing at 7:30 p.m. on the following Mondays in 2004: January 5, January 26, February 9, February 23, Mazch 8, Mazch 29, April 12, Apri126, May 10, May 24, June 14, June 28, July 12, July 26, August 9, August 23, September 13, September 27, October 4, October 25, November 8, November 22, December 6 and December 13. 2. The Council will hold conference meetings at the Fridley Municipal Center, at which time matters are discussed but no formal action taken, commencing at 7:00 p.m. on the following Mondays in 2004: April 19, May 17, August 16, and November 15. 3. On the dates of regular Council meetings, Council information sessions will be held in the Fridley Municipal Center at 7:00 p.m. and following adjournment of each regulaz meeting. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 2003. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK : SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR � � � � � � � V � � � � �� • - V � O O N � ---��- ,--i i —T--r-� I VI V �: O� �' I VJ I . T I �O � i i I V1 O , � � , VI ��I _ _ N R, _ ' � 0. � °� ev � � W ��.. I o � '—�r- I � I 4. l�w I$ � x I X . N ' �� ' L L ' „ TI (- _� � � � i F ° _i I I � �I � F� ��`i-. �I i I � F�.a�o` - , • c�j — i i � _ �—i i C . �'—y � � � I „ r :a 3 - ��. �, � 3 - �, y 3;- = I � 3 �i ,� � ! � ---,---�—' �', • � � --+ ' c I—'�?—' a�i � i,_, '� � � � _ , 1J �.. i _. � ; I� i F-' = � v I� � i ' r � � � � a „ I � ',, :n I I T� � F , I Q r I � � 1 �.O - ',.O', � n i i- ' I �'" O�O' , �� x� �I�;�� i',Q!QI i� � ... _ ,'-i—�--',—'i . ;- . . � �,. I—r---- . - ... �, � � V] � I _ - '. v1 I u _ o ' . Vl ' '. _ . o` '° ' ! VI i � '^ � = � - � . . . 'i � � I � I I � I ~ � � � . � I _ " � . i . —"----r�—�� . , i � o I v�l� _ - j � � -j:; ^_, �� j °', w� ^ - - � � `��''O - '�" I � , ' ,� � , � � ,� :i .� � o I � � y i-� ry I� I, _ 0.,� ° ,"„ I i � �; u„ �'' '^ �- a X � I i � i ' I � " � ��-r--r-+ ' � �./ � >, F. '^ �'�. = °' � 'O ` i i i E. �a i = � ° � .�v . ' 1- '^ � I = � i � ; � F ; • � X = I°� L '. � �� i � i N I ! ' � 3�'�=�� i� I � 3 '" '�`��" � = 3 �" �I—! I � 3i^ ° = � i y o �.. � � ' - � � ¢ m � =�,z MI � ' z �' a � o i a, F _� ��i i i j t-i -Im�r � �,—�_ _�� '� �� , I^ I��'�!x' j i'" lO'�','Q ° � �_ iO � Q r �!-�m�= �I�� I I�'� �I�i�� -'ml=�� N ° - � ; � N I p � .� VI � n O I� lpV I � I � O �'- i N _ i (/7 � lU � N w�l � M i n � 4. � rv I a I`e ,°. W I rv a I'° �� I 4. a �o I� o {L - + � n n i I � ' F�TiO°i= �I�.�,j _ F�_ i�lr,n; I i F- ml=�„ v F ^-° A �31� i^-,�im; I a3; j�lsi-`v� �� 3 I��'_ - ' i g 3j �� -^ ❑ I" � i.�= i; ., " � u , r ►� �..,� i,�� o,r� � �..,, i�o�':�ioiH ,. �.. �ol 'Q I O E..i - a` N. i- � � ;—�I�� "- (�(,� � ' � � 0� I � � Xj�j °' � � � _ � 0 �,r�;=��:�; � �,' iaj_ p,�!; I '' �, e�=�� I �I ° - � ' �� 1 Cl v t� U 0+ C � n � bA GA Q � � � � C a� ai °� a� a> � A � � � ~ U U ^ v � � 3 �, o o � �� :,UU� o�n��DO� �'7 N N =, � � � q '� � �� G �0 � ¢ ... .. �^ . . � q� � N a�.. � ��O 61 ' � . � c � c �3 v o y o oA � U y U .0 3 � Y � L Z U � U � CC � C eC �• � O� �O O� ►7 N N GOD C . �. a� • a� � � � � C � C � � � o � o UwU y V U U � Q � � N C C � � � � U � U c � � O o`i O V � C� �' ` � �U4�U 7 L FL��N y N U C a� on 00 on Q C G �,,, . . � a� a� ,� � � � �ca3 c � � � qUU•-- a�i '� �' �' a°�i �NUU� � � V� \D � N O bD bA C C G � .� .� UU �UU L � � � N N U c CN y O C �I�1 ' •Q% o Qi ,Qi � �X� ��3� U a � U U � �' � � �' � U � W U o �w O�O��N � U � � GbA C ¢ '� ,C '� N N y N O � ��^� c °�' a �3 � c � U ,a�`, U •� a� U U U � �� N N C b�A �Y � � a�i C .� q � .N ,L.° O C. U�"'.�� oz��,°`o ,i, U d c � o � �V;UV�C� w > z°°��NNN Cb� C .� � . N •N N �� Q � � � � O � O �. U w U � � U U U � ��•�-+NM � ` v an on � ,a .� .� � Q �.. � � y � '° A .-.� Q y Q UU ��" .� �VUC�� u A�°�c�v�%, C O C � �N � G � � � U O �U 03 0 U � U U�U d 7 �' �"� 00 ti � N N H � �u C � 00 Q L 6� � ar Q d0 C 6� a� � 0 � 0 �� vl L O 3 � 't7 � � 4 � w � � � � u 0 � L � C 0 U 1 ❑ en : w � �u a 0 U .�. U O � R '� MO W X 0 ` AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 CRY OF FRIDLEY CLA1 MS 113605 - 113827 30 � � AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 arroF LICENSES FRIDLEY Type of License � FOOD Paisley's Brew Joelee Luna 7891 East River Rd Fridley, MN 55432 Broadway Bar & Pizza George Schrauth 8298 University Ave NE Fridley, NIN 55432 INTOXICATING LIQUOR Broadway Bar & Pizza George Schrauth 8298 University Ave NE Fridley, MN 55432 MANAGERIAL LIQUOR DISPENSING Broadway Bar & Pizza George Schrauth 8298 University Ave NE Fridley, NIN 55432 TOBACCO Broadway Bar & Pizza George Schrauth 8298 University Ave NE Fridley, MN 55432 CHARITABLE GAMBLING Broadway Bar & Pizza George Schrauth 8298 University Ave NE Fridley, MN 55432 PEDDLER/SOLICITOR BFI Waste Services David Strom 9813 Flying Cloud Dr Dennis Barlau Eden Prairie, MN 55347 Russell Seaver 31 Approved By: Public Safety Fire Inspector Community Development Public Safety Fire Inspector Community Development Public Safety Fire Inspector Building Inspector Public Safety Public Safety Fire Inspector Community Development Public Safety City Clerk Public Safety Planning Assistant Fees: $45 $45 $4,600 $10 $125 $45 $180 �� 1 City of Fridley AGENDAITEM City Council Meeting Of Monday, October 13, 2003 � Gas Services Faircon Service Company 2560 Kasota Ave Steven Holmer St Paul MN 55108- General Contractor-Commercial Advanced Awning Design _ 1600 29 St Craig Simensen Cloquet MN 55720- LandCor Construction Inc 101 Broadway St W#210 Jerry Pelletier Osseo MN 55369- National Energy Systems 2735 Cheshire Lane Scott Waste Plymouth MN 55447- S& P Construction of St Paul, Inc 608 E Co Rd D Scott Foss St Paul MN 55117- General Contractor-Residential Builders 8 Remodelers Inc (1100) � 3517 Hennepin Ave S Ken Bressler Minneapolis MN 55408- D S Construction of MN Inc (6652) 480 206 Ave NW David Barrett Cedar MN 55011- Exterior Renovations Inc (20213096) 1547 Sextant Ave Dan Norris Roseville MN 55113- 32 Approved Bv: Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building Official State of MN State of MN State of MN � Ford Dwayne Contractor (20093308) 4830 104 Lane NE Dwayne Ford Btaine MN 55014 Season's View Window 8 Door (20168713) 4067 Eaker Ave SE Tom Prior Delano MN 55328- Target Remodeling 13570 Grove Dr #193 Jason Cramer Maple Grove MN 55311- Turco Construction (20287552) 3259 Terminal Dr STE 201 Toby Collins Eagan MN 55124 Heatinq Faircon Service Company 2560 Kasota Ave Steven Holmer St Paul MN 55108- Foremost Mechanical Corp 956 Prosperity Ave John McQuillan St Paul MN 55106- River City Sheet Metal Inc 9928 Bluebird St NW Chris Rapp Coon Rapids MN 55433- Plumbinq Budget Plumbing Corp 5119 Hanson Court Fred Muralt Crystal MN 55429- Roofinq Centimark Corporation 12701 Sheridan Ave #106 Dianna Larson Bumsville MN 55337- �� Approved By: State of MN State of MN State of M N . . State of MN Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building Official State of MN Ron Julkowski Building Official : . n . � � CiiY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 ESTIMATES Hardrives Inc. 14475 Quiram Drive Rogers, MN 55374-9461 2003 Street Improvement Marian Hills Project No. ST 2003 —1 EstimateNo. 5 ....................................................................................... $6,030.17 Creative Curb Contractors 64358 — 375�' Street Watkins, NIN 55389 2003 Miscellaneous Concrete Repair Project No. 351 EstimateNo. 4 .................................................................. 34 .............. $9,397.59 � � i � KNAAK & KANTRUD, P.A. ` r Attomeys at Law Frederic W. Knaak* H.Alan Kantrud** * Also Licensed in Wisconsin & Colorado *• Rule 114 QualifiedADR Civil Neutral June 23, 2003 3500 wIlow Lake Blvd., Suite 800 Vadnais Heights, MN 55110 Telephone: (651)490-9078 Facsimile: (651) 490-1580 Mr. Christopher Dietzen, Esq. Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomington, Minnesota 55431-1194 (BY FACSIMILE @ 952-896-3333 & U:S. MAIL) RE: Your Clients: David Ulrich and Melaina Grover Your File: 28,349-00 Deaz Mr. Dietzen: Of Counsel Donald W. Kohler Joseph B. Marshall Kathy Krider Hart r� r. � , � V'" This letter is intended to, at least in part, respond to yours of May 27, 2003, directed to me, as Fridley City Attorney and Scott Hickok, the Community Development Director of the City of Fridley, Mirinesota. The letter, written on behalf of your clients, made a number of statements and assertions regarding an illegal structure that form�rly existed on your clients' property. Your clients are claiming that they are entitled to continue to have this structure on their property, notwithstanding the fact that they admit to its non-conforming character, and that they are owed some form of damages by the City of Fridley. Given the length of your letter, I will try to address the key points raised, also at some length. You state in your factual background that "By 1975 a larger deck structure was built over the footings and made part of the patio/platform. The deck as it existed in 1974 and as it was remodeled in I975 or so was a lawful use under the then-existing City ordinances." This is not correct. In reviewing the permit file for the address in question, the City's taff has determined that no permit has ever been issued for this deck. The home was built in 19�. The deck was not part of the original construction. Beyond the original permit for �ts construction, no other permit was issued until an electrical and heating permit in 1976. After that time, several subsequent permits were issued. � In July of 1997, two deck permits were issued. The City's files show both decks and neither deck is the one in question. It is clear &om these records that your clients were fully aware of the need for permits, yet did not apply for one when he "rebuilt" the deck in question in 197�. A buildin� permit was required in 197�. The version of the City Code in effect in 1975 (the Fridley City Code of 1971), provided: "Ivo building or use shall be permitted in any district nor shall existing land contour or drainage be substantially altered without a building permit and/or a land alteration pernrit therefore as provided in the City Code of Fridley, and no such permit shall be issued for any building or use not in conformity with applicable structural, safety and sanitary regulations, and not in conformity with the follawing minimum requirements whose purpose is to avoid the establishment of unsafe and unsanitary buildings and uses.....(45.165) Sufficient construction plans or written description of construcrion, grading, excavating, and filling to sarisfy the zoning administrator as to reasonable structural safety and adequacy of building and finished grades for proposed use." The deck in question was, therefore, built without a permit and contrary to law and the time of its construction. You indicated that your clients purchased the home in 1974 and, by 1975, a larger deck structure was built over the footings and made part of the patio/platform. This, you asserted, was a lawful stnzcture at the time. As noted, under the existing law in 1975, this was emphatically not the case. You jo on to state that "since the time the deck was built, the Ciry adopted an ordinance prohibiting the construction of new structures within 40 feet of the Mississippi River B1u,fJ: The deck was (you acknowledge) located within 40 feet of the bluff. Accordingly, the deck was a non-conforming use entitled by law to remain." It is true that the City adopted its bluffland protection legislation and that lawful non-conforming uses could continue to exist in the protected area. In your ciients' case, r�owever, there are two issues: First, of course, is the fact that the use itself was not lawful, since no permits had ever been issued for the construction of the deck in question. In addition, even if such permits had been issued and the structure was otherwise lawful, both eyewitness statements and reports, as well as strong circumstantial evidence shows that the deck was entirely removed and then rebuilt. Rebuilding such a structure, of course, would extinguish the non-conforming use. You should know that the material used was all new and had not evened weathered a single season. New footings were poured to accommodate the entirely new deck configuration and the entire project was fully visible while ongoing from the river. The City has several reports of eyewitnesses who observed the construction. � You indicate that "over time, the deck deteriorated and became dilapidated To remedy the condition, Mr. Ulrich and Ms. Grover repaired and rebuilt the structure. During this period of repair, there was no I2-month period in which my clients were not working on the decl� When the work was completed, the deck was in the exact same location as it had been for the last 30 years. The work performed did not increase the non-conformity, as it remained no closer to the bluff than it had previously existed." While it's not entirely clear to me the point you're making here, Mr. Hickok and the City staff firmly deny that there was any period of continued pro�-ess and years of construction on a gradual, on�oing basis. Witnesses have indicated that the illegal deck was removed. Then it was replaced with new materials and footings. You then indicate that "on September 19, or 20`h, 2002, City officials came onto the property without consent and decided that the deck violated the river bluff requirement On October 21, 2002, the City wrote a letter stating that the deck was illegal and needed to be removed either by my clients or the City.... " I asked Mr. Hickok to comment on this allegation, and this is his response: "Mr. Dietzen fails to mention that on September 19`h, Mr. Ulrich was approached at the door of his home by Ron Julkowski, Buildin� Official; Dave Jensen, Building Inspector; and Scott Hickok, Community Development Director. After introducing ourselves, we asked Mr. Ulrich for permission to look at his deck that was under construction. To which he responded, `Sure, I'Il meet you around back, I need to get my shoes on'. Once we observed the structure, it was clear that the structure was constructed without a germit, improperly positioned over the bluff, and that the construction techniques by which it was constructed were faulty to the point of being dangerous. Therefore, not only was the deck illegal and not permitted, it was actually wobbly, dangerous and lacked the necessary structural inte�ity to remain." It is, therefore, the City's position that these individuals had Mr. Ulrich's express consent to enter the premises on September 19. Moreover, I would note that � 104.2.3 of the 1997 Uniform Building Code states, When necessary t make an inspection to enforce the provisions of this Code, or when the building official has reasonable cause to believe that there exists in a buitding or upon a premises a conditions that is contrary to or in violarion of this Code that makes the premises unsafe, dangerous, or hazardous, the building official may enter the building or premises at reasonable times to inspect or to gerform the duties imposed by this Code. In addition, § 104.2.5 of 1997 Uniform Building Code provides: Whenever any building or structure, or equipment therein regulated by this Code is being used contrary to the provisions of this Code, the building official may order such a use -discontinued and the structure, or portion thereof, vacated by notice served on any person causing such use to be continued. Such person shall disconrinue the use within the time prescribed by the building officiat after such notice to make the structure, or portion thereof, comply with the requirement of this Code. • A written order was handed to Mr. Ulrich by the City of Fridley building official on September 19th, 2002, that required Ulrich to remove the unpernutted structure within 31 days. On October 18, 2002, Mr. Ulrich contacted Fridley City Council Member Ann Bolkcom and asked for relief from the Order. Council Member Bolkcom described to Ulrich the variance procedure in place in the City through the City's Appeals Commission. Ms. Bolkcom then contacted the staff and asked that a packet be sent out for the Appeals Commission variance process. On October 21, 2002, the City wrote a letter to Mr. Ulrich in which the materials needed for an appeal were sent and the appeal process explained. Mr. Ulrich was given until November 8, 2002 to apply for a � variance. Failin� that, the period under the oriQinal Order requirin� removal of the structure would only be extended 30 more days. As Mr. Hickok puts it: "it was made crystal clear to Mr. Ulrich at that time that the application must be complete to be accepted. The instructions were on the back of the Appeals application and the Iist of required materials to be submitted were included with those application materials. Mr. Ulrich made the application on November 8, 2002, and the application was incomplete. The application lacked a scaled diagram of the site showin� precisely where the bluff line was. It also lacked any dimension or scalable elements. Therefore, it would be impossible to ascertain what dimension variance was being requested. To be consistent with every other application with this lack of information, the materials were sent back. Mr. Ulrich was made aware in that letter that he then had 30 days to remove the structure or that the City would do so and assess his property the costs plus an administration fee of 25%." Nearly 45 days after the time provided in his notice, and 90 days after the original order for removal by the Fridley Building Official, a contractor for the City of Fridley removed the structure and put the materials in storage, where they sit until this day waiting for your client to pick them up. Your legal analysis is predicated, unfortunately, on the premise that the deck in question was a legal non-conforming structure. It was not. Moreover, it never was. Not only was it never properly permitted in the first place, it was completely removed before Mr. Ulrich then contructed another. No authority you cite, or that I am otherwise aware of, requires that the City of Fridley to permit continuation of an illegal, non-conforming use, or an otherwise hazardous condition that a resident refuses to eliminate on his or her own accord. Although the Building Code provides for abatement of illegal structures and those proper procedures were, in fact, followed, the City staff further followed the procedures of Chapter 128, allowing Mr. Ulrich the addition protection of having the structure treated as an abatable nuisance. Mr. Ulrich was given 30 days to correct the problem. Mr. Ulrich certainly could have offered his own schedule for correction and he was given an opportunity to appear before the Appeals commission, but failed to do so. This situation presents itself as an almost textbook example of scofflaw conduct on the part of an individual who clearly is surprised that the City would have the temerity to enforce its ordinances. It is very unfortunate that Mr. Ulrich did not take it upon himself to be up front with the City in the construction of his new deck. A good deal of effort and hard feeling could have been avoided if he had not attempted to "finesse" the construction of a structure in the bluffland protection area. What we are now left with is not any sort of claim of due process against a City that bent over backwards to treat him fairly, but rather an ongoing expense of storage that your client needs to resolve soon. � I would be happ� to discuss this matter with you further at your convenience, if you think that would in any way be productive. In the meantime, I remain Very Tru, Yours, . - i � � �� L ��' ,��-`,Y" G-� _ � ,-' Frederic W. Knaak v Fridley City Attorney (cc:) S. Hickok W.Bums e �� (��;K;K��;K�� P, 01 � �c TRANSACTION REPORT � �c JUN-23-2003 MON 01�02 PM � � � � DATE START RECEIVER TX TIME PAGES TYPE NOTE M# DP � � � � JUN-23 01�00 PM 9528963333 2'04" 6 SEND OK 090 � � �c �c � �c TOTAL � 2M 4S PAGES: 6 � �c � �c �c �c � �c �c �c �c � �c �c � Yc ;K �c �c �c �c �c �c �c ;� ;� �c :�c �c �c �c �c �c �c �c ;rc Yc �c � :ic ;�c �c :K Yc �c �c �c ;�c �c �c :�c ;�c ;�c �c ;K �c �c � �c ;�c �c �c �c � �c �c �c ;� �c � � ;�c ;� �� ;� ;� �c ;� �c �c �c ;� ;K �c � �c � �c �c �c �c �K �c �c �c :K �c �c :�c ;rc �c :�c Knaalc & Kantrud, P.A. Attorneys at Law 35Q0 Wi11oW Lake 131vd, Suile 800 St. Pau1, MI�' S5110 Tclephonc (651) 490-9078 Fax (G�1} 490-1580 �ACSIMII,I: CC�VF,IZ SHEET Coufidenriality Notice: The documents accompanyin� this fax contain confidential information which is legally privileged. The information is intendcd only f�r the use of ihe bel�w-ciescribed recipient, Tf you are not that person, then yott are hcreby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking af any action in relianee on the contents of tl�is telecopied infonnation except in its direct cleiivery to thc intended recipient named below is strietly prohibited. Tf you havc rcceiveci this f�x in crror, plcase notify us immediately by telephonc ar arr�i�ge for return of thc ori�inal docutnent(s) to us. Thank you. TO: C;hristopher Uietzen, Bsq. - n��TN: Knaak & Kantrud, P.A. Attorneys at Law 3�00 Willow Lake Blvd, Suite 800 St. Paul, NN » 110 Telephone (651) 490-9078 Fax (651) 490-1580 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET Confidentiality Notice: The documents accompanying this fax contain confidential information which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the below-described recipient. If you are not that person, then you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information except in its direct delivery to the intended recipient named below is strictly prohibited. If you have received this fax in error, please notify us immediately by telephone or arrange for return of the original document(s) to us. Thank you. TO: ATTN: FROM: DATE: RE: Christopher Dietzen, Esq. Fritz Knaak June 30, 2003 David Ulrich and Melaina Grover NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS PAGE: 6 - FAX NUMBER: 952-896-3333 MESSAGE: PHONE NUMBER: If you experience any problems with the quality of this fax, please call us at (651) 490-9078. Our fax number is (651) 490-1580. � October 13, 2003 � City Clerk City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue NE Fridley, MN 55432 Dear City Clerk: r� � � � , � �--��, . �� HA:�1D DELIVERED I am the owner of property at 157 Hartman Circle in the City of Fridley (City). I have reviewed the City's letter dated September 15, 2003 in which the City states that it will be considering assessing my property on October 13, 2003. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 429.061, I am hereby p:esenting my written objection to tr�e proposed assessment in its entirety. - ��... Initially, I note that the City's letter fails to sufficiently disclose the "improvement" to my property for which the City seeks to assess me. The City has indicated in the past that it may seek to charge me for storage of my deck that was wrongfully destroyed and removed from my property. In that regard, my attorneys have explained to the City the unlawfulness of the destruction and removal, the need for the City to rectify its wrongdoing, and the inability of the City to seek compensation for the stora;e of the materials illegally removed. For your convenience, I have enclosed a copy of the letter from my attorneys. In addition to the comments made by my attorneys, I object to the assessment on the grounds that the City has failed to comply with Minn. Stat. Ch. 429, that the City lacks the authority to adopt the proposed assessment, and that the City has not improved or benefited my property. Any obligation imposed under Minn. Stat. § 429.061 does not require me to itemize every individual ground for my objection and I do not waive any grounds that are not stated herein or in the enclosed letter from my attorneys. Simply stated, I object to the entire amount of the proposed assessment and request t:lat the City decline to adopt it. Sincerely, David lrich Enclosure cc: Christopher J. Dietzen, Esq. saaaaa. i City Cler6t'S OttiCe � � Data Rec�ived Forwat� ta Copy to � R��ic�f R08ERTL.HOFFMAN GER/1L� H. FRIEDELL EOWARD J. DRISCOIL JpHN 0. FULLMER FRANK I. MARVEV CNARLES 5. MODELL CMRISTOPNER J. DIE7ZEN �INOA H, fISHER THCMAS P. STOLTMAN 411CHAEl C. JACKMAN JOHN E. DIEH� JON S. 3NIERZEWSKI iHCM4SJ.F�VNN �AMES P. QUINN rCC01.FREEMAN GERALD L. SECK JOHN B. LUNDOUIST DAYLE NOIP.N' JCHN A. COTTER' PAUL B. PLUNKETT KATHLEEN M. PICOTTE NEWMAN GREGORVE.KORSTAO GARY A VAN CLEVE � TIMOTFIY �. KEANE MICNAEL W. SCHLEV TERRENCE E. 015MOP GARY 0. RENNEKE CHRISTOPMER J. HARRISTMAL KENDELJ.OMLROGGE BRUCEJ.00UGLAS W ILLIAM C. GRIFFIiH; JR � JOHN 0. HILL PETERJ.COVIE t.i1RRV D. MARTIN JANE E. BREMER JOHNJ.STEFFENHAGEN MICNAEL 1. SMITM ANOREW F. PERRIN RONAL� S. LONDON FREDERICK W. MEBUHR Nlay 27, 2003 Mr. Scott Hickock LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY 8L LINDGREN, LTD ATTORNEYS AT LAW Community Development Director City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432-4384 1500 WELLS FARGO PLAZA 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH BLOOMINGTCN, MINNESOTA 55431-1194 TELEPHONE (952) 835-3800 FAX (952) 896-3333 Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. City Attorney City of Fridley 3500 Willow Lake Boulevard Suite 800 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55110 RULE 408 COMMUNICATION VIA FAX AND U.S. MAIL Re: Claims Against City of Fridley Our File No.: 28,349-00 Dear Sirs: wauan c. naaHron DOUGLAS M. RAAIER LVNN M.STARKOVICH STEPHEN J. KPA%NSKI TMOMASF.ALEXANDER DANIEL T. KADLEC ADAM 9. HUHTA' SUS4N F. BULLAFiO' KENNETH COREY-EDSTRCM ANN M. MEVER lAMES M. SUSAG' DANIELl. BAWNTiNE JEFFREY 0. CJWILL JOSEPH J. FITTANTE. +R. THOhWS J. OPPOLD " cvNrrun M. a.nus MARK D. CHRISTOPHERSON NEALJ.BLANCMEfT TAMAR40�NEILL MORELINO �amES a r�a�vr, w THOMAS A. GUbP' TODO A TA`/�OR CHRISTOPNER J. DEIKE GENEVIEVE 0. BECK OIONNE M. BENSON JEREMV C. STFj2 JOANI C. MOBEfG CNRIS M. HEFFELBOWER MICMAEL A ES4EN ANNE M. OLSON pFCOUNSEL JAMES P. LARKIN' JACK F. DALV D.KENNETHLINOGREN ' AISOADMITTEDINW15CCNSIN �' ONIV ADMTTED IN IOWA Please be advised that we represent David Ulrich and Melaina Grover in connection with their property located at 157 Hartman Circle in the City of rridley ("City"). More specifically, we represent Mr. Ulrich and Ms. Grover regarding the City's wrongful removal of a deck on their property. In this regard, I have submitted a Data Practices Act request to the City. The City has purported to provide us with all documents relating to the deck on the property as well as copies of all parts of the zoning code relating to enforcement, abatement procedure, and non-conforming uses. Based on our review of the facts and the applicable law, we believe that the City's conduct was wrongful, improper confiscatory, and unconstitutional. Factual Background In 1974, my clients bought property in the City located along the bluffs of the Mississippi River. When they bought the property, it had a deck located on the bluff. Initially, it consisted of stairways, a patio/platform structure, and footings. By 1975 the a larger deck structure was built over the footings and made part of the patio/platform. The deck as it existed in 1974 and as it was remodeled in 1975 or so was a lawful use under the then-existing City ordinances. LARKIN, HOFFMA��1, DALY Bi LINDGREN, LTD. Mr. Scott Hickock Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. May 27, 2003 Page 2 Since the time the deck was built, the City adopted an ordinance prohibiting the construction of new structures within 40 feet of the Mississippi River bluff. The deck was located within 40 feet of the bluff. Accordingly, the deck was a non-conforming use entitled by law to remain. Over time, the deck deteriorated and became dilapidated. To remedy the condition, Mr. Ulrich and N1s. Grover repaired.and rebuilt the structure. During this period of repair, there was no 12-month period in which my clients were not working on the deck. When the work was completed, the deck was in the exact same location as it had been for the last 30 years. The work performed did not increase the non- conformity as it remained no closer to the bluff than it had previously existed. On September 19 or 20, 2002, City officials came onto the property without consent and decided that the deck violated the river bluff setback requirement. On October 21, 2002, the City wrote a letter stating that the deck was illegal and needed to be removed either by my clients or the City. The City stated that my clients could apply for a variance by November 8 and that any legal action would be stayed while the application was under consideration. The City further stated that if the deck was not removed or a variance was not applied for, the City would commence the process to "abate the violation." The letter did not provide notice that my clients had the right to a hearing to challenge the determination that the deck was unlawful. On November 8, 2002, Mr. Ulrich submitted an application to the City for a variance. On November 14, 2002, the City returned the application, claiming that it was incomplete. Rather than permit Mr. Ulrich to provide a completed application, the City stated that our Mr. Ulrich had 30 days to remove the deck or the City would do so. The letter did not inform my clients that they had the right to a hearing before the City could remove the deck. On January 30, 2003, City officials (armed with numerous police officers and squad cars) entered onto the property without permission and removed the deck. The City removed the deck materials and have placed them in a storage facility. According to the City and the storage facility, my clients are being charged for the storage of those materials. The City also claims that it intends to assess the property for the cost of removal. Legal Analysis Nonconformin� ses A nonconformity is generally defined as use that is already legally in existence, but after the adoption of a new ordinance, would not be a use that would be lawfully permitted if the new use had been in effect prior to the adoption of the new ordinance. See Minn. Stat. § 394.22, subd. 8; Black's Law Dictionary at 1540 (7th ed. 1999). The City cannot legislate nonconforming uses and structures out of existence. County of Freeborn v. Claussen, 295 Minn. 96, 99, 203 N.W.2d 323, 325 (1972). If the City wants to rid itself of nonconformities, it must exercise its powers of eminent domain and pay compensation to the private property owners. Id. The City's ordinances recognize its lack of power to simply remove non-conforming uses: LARKIN, HOFFMAIV, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Mr. Scott Hickock Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. May 27, 2003 Page 3 A. Any structure or use lawfully existing upon the effective date of this Chapter may be continued after such date except as hereinafter specified or as allowed under special district requirements. B. Nothing in this Chapter shall prevent the upgrading of a nonconforming structure to a safe condition when such structure is declared unsafe by the City, provided the necessary repairs shall not constitute more than fifty percent (50 %) of the fair market value of such structure. � D. Whenever a lawful no�conforming structure is damaged by fire, flood, explosion, earthquake, tomado, riot, or act of God, it may be reconstructed and used as befare if it is reconstructed within twelve (12) months after such calamity, except of the damage to the building or structure is fifty percent (50 %) or more of its fair market value, as determined by the City, in which case the reconstruction shall be for a use in accordance for the provisions of this Chapter. E. Whenever a lawful nonconforming use of a structure or land is abandoned for a period of twelve (12) months, any future use of such structure or land shall be in conformity with the provisions of this Chapter. H. Normal maintenance of a building or other structure containing or related to a lawful nonconforming use is permitted, including necessary nonstructural repairs and incidental alterations which do not extend or intensify the nonconforming use. Fridley Ord. 204.04(3). The City's ordinances clearly express the intent that the general rule is that a non-conforming use is entitled to remain, subj ect to a few limited exceptions. My clients' deck falls within the general rule, not within any of these limited exceptions. The "new" deck, as the City refers to it, was simply a continuation of a lawful nonconforming use and was entitled to remain in place. The deck was the same use in the same location that existed on the property for the last 30 years. Any work done on the deck did not increase the nonconformity. The City has indicated that my clients abandoned the use for more than 12 months. This could not be any farther from the truth. My clients never intended to abandon the use. Moreover, there was no 12-month period during which they took no action with respect to the deck. Because the deck was a non-conforming use, permitted to remain under both the City's ordinances and the Minnesota and United States Constitutions, the City's removal of the deck without payment of just LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Mr. Scott Hickock Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. May 27, 2003 Page 4 compensation was unlawful. Mr. Ulrich and Ms. Grover are entitled to replace tHe deck in the same location. The only remaining question then is the additional remedies available to my clients. It is worth noting that because of the City's violation of its own ordinances and constitutional law in its "abatement", these remedies are available regardless of whether the deck was lawfuL The Citv's Abatement Procedure The City provided us with a section of its code on which the City purportedly relies to �ive itself authority to come onto the property and remove the deck. Fridley Ord. Ch. 128. The ordinance chapter is entitled "Abatement of Exterior Public Nuisances" and by its express terms applies only to the exterior storage of junk materials or vehicles and other similar materials, which create an exterior public nuisance. Fridley Ord. 128.02. We are at a loss as to how the City believes that this ordinance gave it authority to remove my clients' deck. There simply can be no argument that the deck is the type of material covered by the abatement ordinance.l Accordingly, the City had no authority to destroy the deck without a court order. Even if this section were applicable to the deck, the City failed to follow the procedure set forth therein. Fridley Ord. 128.06. The first requirement on the part of the City for use of this abatement procedure is to provide written notice. This notice may be served only when the City finds with reasonable certainty that an exterior public nuisance exists. The notice has three express requirements. First, it must set forth the specific nature of the violations and the requirement for compliance. Second, the notice must state that the property owner may, within 20 days of the date of the order, request a hearing before the Hearing Examiner. The notice must also explain how that request may be made. Finally, the notice must state that failure to abate the nuisance or request a hearing will result in summary abatement procedures. The City has purported to provide alI documents relating to the deck. I have also received all pertinent documents from my clients. These documents reveal a critical (and perhaps intentional) omission on the part of the City. Nowhere does the City notify my clients of their right to a hearing and explain how to request that hearing. Thus, even if the City could rely on this abatement procedure, its failure to follow it deprived the City of any power under the procedure. The City had r�o right to er.ter onto the property and remove the deck. There are a number of remedies for the City's illegal acts. First, the City's conduct constituted a trespass. Additionally, the removal was a violation of the takings clause of the Minnesota Constitution. As you are likely well aware, under the takings clause, when the government physically appropriates private property, it must compensate the property owner for the taking. Perhaps most importantly, the City's misconduct was a rather clear violation of my clients' rights to procedural due process. Procedural due process requires that before the government deprives an We have also been given a City staff policy statement, which provides for the inspection of properties in the City for code violations. But this policy statement does not purport to give City staff the authority to unilaterally remove structures, nor could staff be given the authority to impose such a deprivation of property. LARKIN, HOFFMAI�1, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. Mr. Scott Hickock Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. May 27, 2003 Page 5 individual of a property interest, it must, at a minimum, provide reasonable notice and a hearing. CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, 633 N.W.2d 557, 563 (Minn. App. 2001); In re Dakota Telecommunications Group, 590 N.W.2d 644, 649 (Minn. App. 1999). My clients indisputably were not given a hearing. Even if the City's abatement ordinance is legal (which it likely is not), that ordinance was not followed. A violation of the right to procedural due process is a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil rights statute. Bird v. State Dept. of Pub. Safety, 375 N.W.2d 36, 42 (Minn. App. 1985). A Section 1983 violation entitles the injured citizen to recover damages, attorney fees, and even punitive damages. These remedies are particularly applicable in this case where the City entered onto private property without any ri�ht or permission and, at gunpoint, destroyed structure on the property. Conclusions and Demand We are hopeful that this matter can be resolved without litigation. But Mr. Ulrich and Ms. Grover are entitled to a remedy for the wrong they have suffered. This must include, at the very minimum, the City's agreement that it will not interfere with my clients' rebuilding of the deck unlawfully removed by the City. The City must also agree to pay for the costs of such rebuilding. If the City is unwilling to agree to this minimal request, we will be forced to take all action necessary to protect my clients' rights. To the extent that any notice is reguired, please be advised that this letter is notice of a claim pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 466.05. Please contact me by June 5 to discuss the City's intentions with respect to this matter. Sincerely, Christopher J. Dietzen, far LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd. cc: Dave Ulrich and Melaina Grover 855467.1 � AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 GTY OF FRIDLEY ,r,,�, TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER ,��,x' �� FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIItECTOR , GREG TIltEVOLD, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE ON THE 2003 NUISANCE ABATEMENT ` DATE: October 8, 2003 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the 2003 Nuisance Abatement. The Public Hearing Norice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 25, 2003 as required by State Statute. RDP/gt Attachment 35 CTTY OF FRIDLEY, AIYOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PUBLIC HEARiNG Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridley City Council will conduct a public hearing at 7:30 p.m. on October 13, 2003 in the Council Chambers at 6431 University Avenue, to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment for the following improvements: 2002 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Project #2002-1 2003 NUISANCE ABATEMENT 6211 Sunrise Drive 157 Hartman Circle 5750 Madison Avenue Assess 10 years @ 6.5% Interest $109,897.52 Edgewater Gardens Neighborhood Assess 1 year @ 6.5% Interest $ 7,277.00 The proposed assessment rolls are on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. Notices are being mailed to all property owners. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prior to the hearing or is presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The council may, upon such notice, consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjoumed meeting, upon such further notice to the affected property owners, as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 141995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The Crty Council may defer the payment of special assessments for any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments. Publish: September 25, 2003 Scott J. Lund Mayor 36 a.— —v.. � � � To: City of Fridley _ J() � ,,-- Greg Tirevold, Special Assessments � C�' � From: Donald Holien & Mary ReVoir (Holien) Date: October 13, 2003 The followiag is our written objection to the proposed assessment on our property located at 47 Rice Creek Way NE, Fridley, MN 55432. The reason we are objecting is because we incurred a large amount of damage to our home while the improvements to the street were beiag completed. T6e workers for the company that was doing the work sealed the sewer that was located in front of our property. There was a heavy rainfall and since the sewer was blocked the rain from the street came pouring into our front yard which is tocated at the bottom of a hitt in the neighbor600d. T6e rain was getting very deep in our yard and started coming into the house all along the front and side of the house. Four men from across the street helped us shovel the rain around to the rear of the house where it would run into the lake. One of the men was video taping everything that was happening. It was on the weekend so we could not reach anyone at the city offices so we called 911 and said we were having a major flood and asked if they could send someone over from the city to open the sewer. A city worker came over and he wasn't sure w6at to do. He managed to create a small opening in the sewer for t6e rain to drain which helped somewhat. As a result of the rain and mud seepage into our home the carpet in our family room has mud stains and the carpet in one of the bedrooms is stained in a iarge area where the glue got wet and came up through the carpet and stained it yellow. The city must have been aware that this was a problem area because they placed two new sewers there that have built in back-up systems for heavy rainfall. We talked to our insurance agent recently and she said that the city or who they hired shonld be responsible for the damages to our home and for compensation to us. We feel that we should not have to pay the assessments until we are compensated for the damages that were caused as a resnit of the road improvements. _ � � cmr oF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: � AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 �VILLIAI�T W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER i��1�f . r'�� RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINAI�ICE DIRECTOR GREG TIREVOLD, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2002-1 DATE: October 8, 2003 Attached is the Public Hearing Notice for the assessment for the Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2002-1. The Public Hearing Notice was published in the Focus newspaper on September 25, 2003 as required by State Statute. RDP/gt Attachment 37 � . � � CITY OF FRIDLEY, ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that the City of Fridley City Council will conduct a public hearing at 7:30 p.m. on October 13, 2003 in the Council Chambers at 6431 University Avenue, to consider, and possibly adopt, the proposed assessment far the following improve ments: 2002 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Project #2002-1 Z003 NUISANCE ABATEMENT 6211 Sunrise Drive 157 Hartman Circle 5750 Madison Avenue Assess 10 years @ 6.5% Interest $109,897.52 Edgewater Gardens Neighborhood Assess 1 year @ 6.5% Interest $ 7,277.00 The proposed assessment rolls are on file for public inspection at the Finance Office. Notices are being mailed to all property owners. Written or oral objections will be considered at the meeting. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of an assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the clerk prior to the hearing or is presented to the presiding officer at the hearing. The council may, upon such notice, consider any objection to the amount of a proposed individual assessment at an adjourned meeting, upon such further notice to the affected property owners, as it deems advisable. An owner may appeal an assessment to district court pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 429.081 by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the City within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. The City of Fridley has adopted Resolution No. 14-1995 deferring special assessment payments for senior citizens. The City Council may defer the payment of special assessments for any homestead property owned by a person 65 years of age or older for whom it would be a hardship to make the payments. Publish: September 25, 2003 Scott J. Lund Mayor : � � 0 � f QTY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 � WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER� r�� .,� RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FPTANCE DIRECTOR GREG TIREVOLD, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SUBJECT: RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE 2003 NUISANCE ABATEMENT DATE: October 8, 2003 Attached you will find the final assessment roll for the 2003 Nuisance Abatement along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. The assessment includes 3 properties at a cost of $7,277.00. The assessment will be certified for 1 year at an interest rate of 6.5%. RDP/gt Attachment 39 � RESOLUTION NO. 2003 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENT FOR 2003 NUISANCE ABATEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council ha s met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the 2003 Nuisance Abatement. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of one year, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2004, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6%z percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2004. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 2003. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK . � SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR 2003 ASSESSMENT FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT Name PIN No. Actual Assessment Anthony Howe 14-30-24-33-0004 $ 1164.85 6211 Sunrise Drive Fridley, MN 55432 David Ulrich 15-30-24-12-0052 $ 3,862.34 157 Hartman Circle Fridley, MN 55432 Pairdon Colstrom 23-30-24-13-0070 $ 2,249.81 5750 Madison Avenue Fridle , MN 55432 41 . � arr oF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 n WILLIAM W. BUR�1S, CITY MANAGER�� r RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR GREG TIREVOLD, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS SUBJECT: RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE 2002 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2002-1 DATE: October 8, 2003 Attached you will find the final assessment roll for the 2002 Street Improvement Project No. St. 2002-1 along with the Resolution to adopt the assessment. This project included 94 properties. The assessment will be for 10 years at a rate of 6.5%. RDP/gt Attachment 42 0 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. -2003 RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSNIENT FOR THE 2002 STREET IrIPROVEME�TT PROJECT NO. 2002-1 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for the 2002 Street Improvement Project No. 2002-1. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FRIDLEY, NINNESOTA: Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and �hall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract of land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it. Such assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2004, and shall bear interest at the rate of 6'h percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 2004. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest far one year on all unpaid installments. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the county auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the city treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the city treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the ne}ct succeeding year. The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the county auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the county. Such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF OCTOBER, 2003. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR 43 ASSESSMElYT ROLL FOR S"iREET IMPROVEMEIYT PROJECT I`f0. ST. -2002 Estimated Assessment for Concrete Curb � Actual Gutter Based on flssessment Address PII`I I`!o. Front Ft �15.00 per Front Ft �12.90 per Front Ft LEOI�G PATRICK K& WORKMAI`I 153024110006 76 1,140.00 981.92 AJ 17 RICE CREEK WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MI`1 55432 TURBAK FLOREnCE E 153024110007 77 1,155.00 994.84 23 RICE CREEK WAY I`� FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 MAGhESS GLORIA J 153024110008 107 1,605.00 1,382.44 29 RICE CREEK WAY nE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 tIEUi'MAKER PFIYLLIS C 153024110010 - 100 1,500.00 1,292.00 TRUS�E 35 RICE CREEK WAY I`� FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 LI'fTLER KEnnARD A 153024110011 100 1.500.00 1,292.00 41 R10E CREEK WAY nE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 I10LIEh DOIYALD J& REVOIft 153024110012 90 1,350.00 1,162.80 MARY 47 KKE CREEK WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 OTiEn DEnIYIS tl Lt JOY L 153024110013 90 1,350.00 1,162.80 53 RICE CREEK WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 FILER STEPtiEIY G Sc JAI`IICE L 153024110014 85 1,275.00 1,098.20 10 R10E CREEK WAY I`iE FRIDLEY, M(Y 55432 GLASER JAMES P& LAI`W JOY 153024110015 80 IZ00.00 1,033.60 16 RICE CREEK WAY I`� FRIDLEY, M(`I 55432 STRAUMHI`I JOAtY E 153024ll0016 84 1,260.00 1,085.28 22 RKE CREEK WAY I`� - FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 ROBInSOn JAMES L 8t ARLEnE 153024110017 91 1,365.00 1,175J2 G 35 67fF1 WAY nE FRIDI,EY, MIY 55432 FLEIGLE ELAII`iE M 153024110018 75 1,125.00 969.00 25 67t'Fi WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 GRAt1AM ftOBERT R Lt DIAI`IE li 153024110019 75 1,125.00 969.00 17 67ft1 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 nOWLIn CARL V& ESTER 153024110020 85 1,275.00 1,098.20 II 67Tt1 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MI`1 55432 i � ASSFSSMEIYI' ROLL FOR S�ET IMPROVEMEIYT PROJECT n0. ST. -2002 Estimated l�lssessment for Concrete Curb � Actual Gutter Based on Assessment Address PII`I I�o. Pront Ft �15.00 per Front Ft fi12.90 per Front Ft t11nZ GREGG C Lt BOnn� M 153024110021 86 1,290.00 l,lll.l2 6715 ASFiTOIY AVE nE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 F10LLIIIAI`1 JOtin T& KIMBERLY 153024(10022 75 1,125.00 969.00 6709 AStiTOn AVE nE FRIDLEY, Mn �5432 REBRO JUSTin T� YVILILYI`I P 153024110023 75 1,125.00 969.00 6705 ASKI"OI`I AbE hE FRIDLEY, Mh 55432 FICEnKO LVILLIAM Sc OLSOn D E 153024110029 121 1,815.00 1,56332 15 RICE CREEK WAY nE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 SCFIULTZ KEnI�ETti P& F10LLY 153024110030 109 1,635.00 1,408.28 Il RICE CREEK WAY NE FRIDLEY, MI`1 55432 FARMER GREGO RY I St MARY M 1530241300ll 90 1,350.00 1.162.80 71 RICE CREEK WAY nE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 JOFI1YSOn WILLIAM E St CAROL Y 153024130012 90 1,350.00 1.162.80 75 RICE CREEK WAY nE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 BERGQUIST ALLEn & LOIS 153024�130013 86 1,290.00 1.111.12 77 RICE CREEK WAY nE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 bVESTEnFIELD MARLISS A 153024130014 94 1,410.00 1,214.48 81 R10E CREEK WAY hE FRIDLEY, M!Y 55432 SKARFiUS ROI`1At.D E& KAY A 153024130015 83 1,245.00 1,07236 85 RICE CFi�EK WAY I`� FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 LOUGI1LIn PAUL R T53024I30017 75 1,125.00 969.00 72 RICE CREEK WAY I`� - FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 JOFiNSOIY DEAI`I E 153024130019 75 1,125.00 969.00 80 R10E CREEK WAY I`� FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 STOREVIK ROBERT M 153024130021 75 1,125.00 969.00 84 RICE CREEK WAY hE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 nELSOn 6RUCE LY BEVERLY 153024130022 74 1,110.00 956.08 90 RICE CREEK WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 tiART DAV1D L�t WAIYDA K 153024130023 78 1,170.00 1,007.76 91 66Tt1 WAY I`1E FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 45 ASSESSNiEIYI' ROLL FOR S�ET (MPROVEMEIYT PRO.IECT n0. ST. -2002 Estimated Assessment for Concrete Curb � Actual Gutter Based on Assessment Address PII`I I`lo. Front Ft �15.00 per Front Ft 512.90 per Front Ft F1YL/il`iD MARK L Et KAREI`I L 153024130024 75 1,125.00 969.00 81 66TIi WAY nE FRIDLEY, MI`i �5432 SETERInG DUAI`IE PE"tER �Y D C 153024130025 75 1,125.00 969.00 7l 66Tf1 WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 YURI(EW SR DAV1D A& nICKY L 153024130026 90 ],350.00 1,162.80 80 66TF1 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 DUPAY WILLIAM & PAULA 153024130027 79 1,185.00 l,020.68 90 66TFi WAY nE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 GERDIIY BRYHI`I 8t SA(`IDRA 153024130028 81 1,215.00 1,046.52 91 65 1/2 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MI`1 55432 nELSOn ELDOn D 8t SAI`1DRA L 153024130029 109 1,635.00 1,408.28 6660 Ii1CKORY ST I`IE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 nGUYEN JAMES T& JULIA L 153024130030 90 1,350.00 1,162.80 6640 F1ICKORY ST I`IE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 JOIinSOIY DOI`IAL.D E 8t St11RLEY 153024130031 94 1,410.00 1,214.48 6600 F1ICKORY ST I`� FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 LARSOn RIChIARD A�r I`1AIYCE E 153024130032 90 1,350.00 1,162.80 6580 t11CKORY ST hE FRIDLEY, MI`1 55432 AMBUtiL DA1M`f & GFtEGORY 153024130035 90 1,350.00 1,162.80 6544 Fi1CKORY ST I`� FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 LHf`IGER MIRTFi B TRUS"fEE 153024130036 90 1,350.00 1,162.80 6530 Fi1CKORY ST i`{E FftIDLEY, MIY 55432 OLSOn OMER 8t FLOREnCE 153024130052 151 2,265.00 1.950.92 98 RICE CREEK WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 IYORBERG BRUCE S& JUAI`I�fA 153024130061 67 1,005.00 865.64 M 6560 F1ICKORY ST hE FRIDLEY, Mh 55432 GOIYZALEZ CIIARLES t1 8t 153024130062 67 1,005.00 865.64 Cl'I`ITY11A T 6570 t11CKORY ST IYE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 BAKKE IIERMAI`i 8t St1AROlY 153024140001 115 1,725.00 1,485.80 59 RICE CREEK WAY I`� FRIDLEY, MI`1 55432 � � � ASSESSMEI`fi' ROLL FOR S�ET IMPROVENIEIYI' PRO.JECT n0. ST. -2002 Estimated Assessment for Concrete Curb � Actual Gutter Based on Assessment Address PII`I I`1o. Front Ft �15.00 per Front Ft �12.90 per Front Ft RUIKtW PAUt, M Lt ROSE E 153024140002 90 1,3�0.00 1,162.80 65 RICE CREEK WAY nE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 AIYDERSOn LARS G 8t AI`frA E 153024140003 130 1,950.00 1,679.60 6696 ASFiT01`i AVE nE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 BOSKOV1Ct1 BORIS St MARYAI`IIY 153024140004 75 1,125.00 969.00 16 6iTF1 WAY I`iE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 YAf'iG YOU 8c SAi 153024140005 75 1.125.00 969.00 24 67T11 WAY I`iE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 SCFIMIDT ROBERT E� JUDfftf C 153024I40006 75 1,125.00 969.00 32 67i'ti WAY nE FRIDLEY, M(`1 55432 GABEL PATRICIA 153024140007 126 1,890.00 1,627.92 5947 2 1/2 STREET nE 40 Rice Cric Way FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 STECKMAh ROI`IALD E& EUIYICE 153024140008 126 1,890.00 1.627.92 58 RICE CREEK WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 IIAMER BARBARA 153024140009 75 1,125.00 969.00 41 66 V2 WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 ALLEIY DAVID & JOAI`I 153024140010 75 1,125.00 969.00 9540 S KIMBLE RD 33 66-1/2 Way PEQUOT LAKES MN 56472 f10VE MARK A& SUZAI`11YE Y 153024140011 75 1,125.00 969.00 25 66 1/2 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 SFIELTOIY JOt11Y D& BOI`I�I'A L 153024140012 75 1,125.00 969.00 17 66 I/2 WAY I`� - FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 WFIALEIY DOnALD J& DEHI`11`IE 153024140013 81 1,215.00 1,046.52 M il 66 1/2 WAY nE FRIDI,EY, MIY 55432 LE VOIR RICtIARD E 153024140014 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 10 66 1/2 WAY nE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 ADOLPtiSOIY KEI`IT O& CYIYTFIIA 153024140015 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 16 66 I/2 WAY IYE FftIDLEY, MIY 55432 BOSKOVICIi STEVEn J 153024140016 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 24 66 1/2 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 �_7__■ ASSESSMEIYT ftOLL FOR S'iREET tMPROVEN1ElYT PRO,JECT i`�O. ST. -2002 Estimated fissessment for Concrete Curb � Actual Gutter Based on Assessment Address PII`i I`1o. Front Ft �15.00 per Front Ft �12.90 per Front Ft KAZMIERKOSKI JOAI`I V 153024140017 80 1,200.00 1.033.60 32 66 1/2 WAY nE FRIDI,EY, Mn 55432 BI.AIR RICt1ARD S�Y BETTE M 153024140018 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 40 66 1/2 WAY nE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 JEnKInS DOIYAL.D � ROSLITI 153024140019 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 48 66 1/2 WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 BARTELS V E& P A TRUSTEES 153024140022 101 IS15.00 1,304.92 64 RICE CREEK WAY I`iE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 SOLBERG DALE W& PAMELA J 153024140023 86 1,290.00 1,111.12 65 66TF1 WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 GUf1Al`iICK DAf`11EL J 8t 153024140024 87 1,305.00 1,124.04 BARBARA 55 66TF1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 FIOLLEh KERMfT' E 8t tRfll`ICES 153024140025 88 1,320.00 1,136.96 M 49 66TF1 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 GREVEn DIAI`IE M 153024140026 75 1,125.00 969.00 41 66Tt1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 MEIER ALFRED E 8t JULIE L 153024140027 75 1,125.00 969.00 33 66TF1 WAY I`iE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 JOFinSOIY BOhITA R 153024140028 75 1,125.00 969.00 25 66Tt1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 TERWISSCtIH GAY L 153024140029 75 1,125.00 969.00 17 66Tt1 WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 Tt11MMESCFI YIAROLD J� MARY 153024140030 95 1,425.00 1,227.40 E ll 66Tt1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 BJORKLUIYD MARSFIALL V� L 153024140031 85 1,275.00 1,098.20 10 66TF1 WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, MtY 55432 I10FFMAIY AMY K 153024140032 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 18 66Tt1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, Mh 55432 ALLARD MARK G 8t REI`IAE K 153024140033 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 28 66TF1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 ASSESSMEIYT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEME(YT PROJECT I`IO. ST. -2002 Estimated Assessment for Concrete Curb � Actual Gutter Based on Assessment Address PII`I I`lo. Front Ft 515.00 per Front Ft �12.90 per Front Ft tiE^!DRICKS CARTEft & FAYE 153024140034 80 1,200.00 1.033.60 38 66Tti WAY I�E FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 DIEDERICFI ROLAI`ID J 8t Jr1fYE L 15302414003� 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 46 66Tt1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 WILLEY ,JERALD D 153024140036 78 1,170.00 1.007.76 �4 66Tt1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 ST MARIE BRE(`IT L& SARiati J 153024140037 97 1,4F55.00 1,253.24 62 66Tt1 WAY nE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 t1ART RICt1ARD W& LU`IDA D 153024140038 83 1,245.00 1,07236 70 66Tt1 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, Mn 56432 GETAtiUn INEBIT Lt KfISSA A 153024140039 75 1,125.00 969.00 81 65 1/2 WAY I`IE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 SICf1AK MICtIAEL & VIOLA J 153024140040 82 1,230.00 1,059.44 7l 65 1/2 WAY nE FRIDLEY, M(`1 55432 STEInMAi`in FREDERICK Sc 153024140041 86 1.290.00 1,111.12 PAULETTE 61 65 I/2 WAY I`� FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 JOFinSOIY WALTER R&,JEAIY A 153024140042 88 1,320.00 1,136.96 51 65 1/2 WAY i`iE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 VAI`I EE Rllftl GRACE L.EnOFiA 153024140043 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 41 65 1/2 WAY I`� FRIDt,EY, MIY 55432 FIALVERSOIY DAVID E St DOREEI`i 153024140044 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 31 65 1/2 WAY hE FRIDLEY, M(`I 55432 BOEDIGtiEIMER ELWIIY L& A I 153024140045 80 1,200.00 1,033.60 21 65 1/2 WAY IYE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 VRKWAIY PAUL M Lt LAIYGER C 153024140046 95 1,425.00 1,227.40 M 11 65 1/2 WAY I`� FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 REDEEMER LUTI1ERAn Ct1URCt1 153024140047 494 7,410.00 6,382.48 6l MISSISSIPPI WAY (574 less 80 ft FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 credi� MCCiiLLICUDDY J A& J L 153024140050 70 1,050.00 904.40 6701 ASt1TOlY A�E nE FRIDLEY, MIY 55432 � • ASSESSMEIYT ROLL FOR SlREET IMPROVEMEIYT PROJECT n0. ST. -2002 Estimated f�ssessment for Concrete Curb � Actual Gutter Based on fissessment Address Pil`1 I`lo. Front Ft �15.00 per Front Ft �12.90 per Front Ft TROJAI`10WSKI D J Lt JOtil`ISOI`1 153024140051 70 1,050.00 904.40 C R 6699 AStiTOP1 A�E rE FRIDLEY, MI`i 55432 RITCFIIE DOUGLAS St PATRICIA 1�3024140069 89 1,335.00 1,149.88 6685 AStiT01`I A1iE nE FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 CAMARILLO A(`1TOrl0 � TERESA 153024140070 88 1.320.00 1,136.96 6673 ASt1T0n A1/E !"E FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 CRACRAF"f RICFIARD J 8t LORA 153024140071 88 1.320.00 L136.96 M 6651 ASYffOIY AVE (YE - FRIDLEY, MI`I 55432 SPADGEIYSKE SCOTT A& KIM M 153024140084 99 1,485.00 1,279.08 56 66 1/2 WAY nE FRIDLEY, Mn 55432 8506 S 109,89752 50 , � a cmr oF FRIDLEY To: From: Date: Re: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF October 13, 2003 William W. Burns, City Manager �;� Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk October 6, 2003 Request for Hotel/Motel License from Applicant Wayne Rixmann, LivInn Suites Standard practice pertaining to license applications is to forward the application to the Police Department to have a background investigation completed on the applicant, and other departments for their review. If there are no concerns, the license request is then placed on the list for License approvals. If there is a concern or issue with a license, the license may be taken off of the list and discussed . separately by the City Council. After completing the background investigation, the Police Department has a few concerns it would like � to discuss with the City Council. Chief Sallman has provided those concerns in writing and are shown in Attachment 1. Staff would recommend that the City Council review and discuss concerns before approving this license. 51 ///i„''�?-� �\\\ i�� .:�\ r � \�� , �� Fridley Police Department Memorandum To: Deb Skogen From: Dave Sallman Date: September 19, 2003 Re: LivInn Suites License I have checked the space recommending denial of the Hotel/Motel License for the LivInn Suites. A background investigation into the owner of the LivInn Suites revealed that he has previously opened a similar business in Maplewood with the same name and venue. During the first 9 months of business in Maplewood there were 163 calls for service, of which 96 fall into the crime category. During the last 9 months of business as the Best Western Kelly Inn (previous name of the business) there were 31 calls for service. Of greater concern is that the 31 calls for service during the last 9 months as the Super 8 motel, the majority of the calls were relatively minor service type calls (car lockouts, parking complaints and several loud party calls). After the LivInn Suites opened the calls included many more disturbing the peace, drugs, assaults, etc. We do not have much history yet but we have also noticed an increase in calls for service at the Fridley location since it has opened as LivInn Suites. Please have this item placed on the Council Agenda for October 13`h, 2003 so that the issue may be discussed publicly. Copy to: Bill Burns 52 . � . . r � AGENDA ITEM cmroF CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 13, 2003 PRIDLEY INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS 53