01/26/2004 - 00026438CITY OF FRIDLEY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY 26, 2004
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.
PRESENTATION OF AWARD.
Mr. Steve Benoit, who worked with the City of Shoreview Parks and Recreation Department and
represented the Minnesota Recreation & Park Association's Awards Committee, presented the
Minnesota Recreation & Park Association Award of Excellence to Mr. Dave Kondrick It was
presented to Mr. Kondrick for his outstanding work with the Fridley Parks and Recreation
Commission.
Mr. Dave Kondrick thanked the MRPA for the award. He said he had enjoyed being on the
commission for the past twenty-five years. He said the members of the commission really cared
what happened in the City. He also thanked the City Council and Jack Kirk.
STATE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION.
Representative Char Samuelson said she represented a small, but important area of Fridley. Her
main focus this legislative term would be health and human services finance and health and human
services policy. Insurance premiums for healthcare were getting very high and expensive. The
Health and Human Services Finance Committee was looking at ways to decrease the inflation in
health care insurance. She was working with the Nursing Home Association to see if some of the
paperwork regulations could be reduced. She would also be looking whether there were areas of
local government control that needed to be addressed.
Councilmember Barnette said he would like to see them look into administrative fines.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Representative Samuelson thought they would allow cities to
levy back lost aid.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 2
Representative Samuelson said she did not think that would happen this year. She said she knew
there were no levy limits for 2005.
Mr. Burns said they were concerned about 2005. He said the City stood to lose a lot more aid in
2005. Probably the most important issue of all was whether they could levy back that lost aid.
Senator pon Betzold said he represented the northeast part of Fridley, all of Mounds View, all of
Columbia Heights and about 98 percent of Blaine. This was the second year of the two-year
biennium. Last year was the budget year and they had to balance the State's budget. The
November forecast said there was a$185 million deficit. They would get another forecast at the
end of February. It was a lot of money, but in the conte�t of a$28 billion budget, it was a smaller
number and should be manageable. He thought it was an important year for the Northstar Corridor
project. The Governor recently expressed support and provided some bonding money for it. The
Senate had supported it, so it was up to the House. The sex offender issue was a big one and they
would be spending time on that. He said he would be carrying the Vikings stadium proposal for
Anoka County. It would be part of a major complex and the stadium would be used year-round.
The Vikings' current lease would run out in about seven years, and in order to have a new stadium
built by then a decision would need to be made soon. The Vikings would like to have their
training camp, their headquarters and the stadium all in one place. He thought .08 blood alcohol
concentration bill would pass. Levy limits were due to expire, and the Senate was not in support
of them and he did not think they would support reinstituting them. He would like to see
something done about expanded levy authority to get back the loss of local government aid, but he
was not sure if that would happen. They would try again to get the levy passed for the Fridley
Community Center which was shared by the City of Fridley and the Fridley School District. He
said there was a town meeting scheduled Thursday, February 12, 2004, in the City Council
chambers from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Representative Connie Bernardy discussed local government aid. She said she would do all she
could to make sure Fridley was treated fairly and the local government aid was preserved. Wine in
grocery stores was also an issue she was trying to prevent. She was on the Education Committee
and would try to do all she could to restore the $180 millions in cuts that were made to education
last year. If they could not make the town meeting on February 12, there would also be a meeting
on February 4 in Spring Lake Park, February 7 in Blaine, and February 14 in Mounds View.
Representative Barb Goodwin said she thought it would be a long controversial session. In
addition to the issues discussed by the other legislators, they would have to look at the capital
punishment issue, all of the stadium proposals, and a healthcare proposal. The healthcare proposal
would basically make the non-profit healthcare system in Minnesota a for-profit healthcare system.
It also took a lot of regulations off the insurance companies. They would not need prior approval
for rate increases and it also limited the liability to $250,000. She said she appreciated the efforts
made by the cities to balance their budgets. She suggested that residents lobby the legislature,
particularly the Speaker and the Governor about the formula for local government aid.
Representative Goodwin said she would be holding town meetings on January 31, at 11:00 a.m. at
the Fridley library and one at 1:30 p.m. at the Columbia Heights library.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 3
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of December 8, 2003
City Council Meeting of December 15, 2003
APPROVED.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. ORDINANCE NO. 1183 TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS
(REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #03-04, BY RAS PROPERTIES) (WARD 1).
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the second reading of the ordinance would
complete the rezoning of twelve apartment properties in the 74th and 75th Avenue/Lyric
Lane area from R-2 to R-3. The rezoning also included, for purposes of eliminating spot
zoning, the rezoning of church property from R-1 to R-3. The rezoning corrected non-
conforming use status for all of the apartment properties that occurred as a result of City
rezoning in the late 1960s. The Planning Commission approved this rezoning at their
meeting on December 17, 2003. Council approved the first reading of the ordinance at its
meeting on January 5, 2004. Staff recommended Council's approval.
WAIVED THE READING AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1183 ON SECOND
READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION.
NEW BUSINESS:
2. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF
JANUARY 7, 2004.
RECEIVED.
3. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-22, BY PROFORM THERMAL
SYSTEMS, INC., TO ALLOW LIMITED OUTDOOR STORAGE IN A HEAVY
INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7805 BEECH
STREET N.E. (WARD 3).
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the permit would allow outdoor storage at 7805
Beech Street. Petitioners wished to maintain existing enclosed storage of construction
equipment behind their building. Since the storage met all nine requirements of the City
Code, staff recommended Council's approval with two stipulations.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 4
APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-22, BY PROFORM
THERMAL SYSTEMS, INC., WITH THE FOLLOWING TWO STIPULATIONS:
1. ANY EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE ON THE SITE SHALL BE REMOVED
OR PROPERTY STORE IN THE SCREENED STORAGE AREA BY MARCH 1,
2004; AND 2. NO OUTDOOR STORAGE OTHER THAN THE STORAGE OF
ITEMS USED FOR THIS BUSINESS.
4. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-23, BY MALTON EQUIPMENT
COMPANY, TO ALLOW LIMITED OUTDOOR STORAGE IN A HEAVY
INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7580
COMMERCE LANE N.E. (WARD 3).
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the permit would allow outdoor storage at 7580
Commerce Lane. Petitioner wished to store pallets, fiberglass tooling, a metal recycling
bin and miscellaneous materials in the rear yard of the property. Since the storage met all
nine requirements of the City Code, staff recommended Council's approval with two
stipulations.
APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-23, BY MALTON
EQUIPMENT COMPANY, WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1.
EXISTING GATE TO HAVE SLATS INSTALLED IN ORDER TO COMPLY
WITH CODE REQUIREMENTS BY AUGUST 1, 2004; AND 2. NO OUTDOOR
STORAGE OTHER THAN THE STORAGE OF ITEMS USED FOR THIS
BUSINESS.
5. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-25, BY AGRO-K CORPORATION, TO
ALLOW LIMITED OUTDOOR STORAGE IN A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING
DISTRICT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 8030 MAIN STREET N.E. (WARD 3).
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the permit would allow outdoor storage at 8030
Main Street. It would allow outdoor storage of 55 gallon drums in a 30' x 50' area by the
loading dock Since the storage met all nine requirements of the City Code, staff
recommended Council's approval with two stipulations.
APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-25, BY AGRO-K
CORPORATION, WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1. SCREENING
GATE TO BE CLOSED TO ALLOW PROPER SCREENING OR PETITIONER
TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL SCREENING FENCE IN FRONT OF THE
BARRELS TO SCREEN THEM FROM THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY; 2. NO
OUTDOOR STORAGE OTHER THAN THE STORAGE OF ITEMS USED FOR
THIS BUSINESS.
6. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-05 SUPPORTING RECYCLING OPTIONS FOR CRTs.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the regional Solid Waste Coordinating Board
(composed of two County Commissioners from six of the seven metropolitan counties)
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 5
asked Council to support a resolution asking for State legislation that made manufacturers
responsible for the disposal of cathode ray tubes or picture tubes from computers and
television sets. Staff recommended Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-05.
7. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-06 PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $1,790,000 G.O.
WATER REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004A.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the bonds were being issued to provide funding for
the following projects: 1. Marian Hills Tower Replacement; 2. Recondition the Water
Treatment Plant; 3. Repair and Renovation Commons Park Tower; 4. Water Tower #2,
Repair and Paint; and 5. Water Main Relining on 83rd Avenue RR to Main Street. While
bonds were normally sold after completion of projects, interest rates were such that we
recommended an advance sale of bonds for these 2004-2005 projects. The proceeds of the
sale could be held for a period of three years in anticipation of projects. The debt for this
issue had been structured in a manner that maintained debt service for the Water Fund at
about the same level as in 2003. Staff recommended Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-06.
8. RESOLUTION NO 2004-07 PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $3,920,000 G.O.
TAXABLE TAX INCREMENT REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004B.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the resolution authorized the sale of bonds that
would refinance the 1998 bonds used to purchase the Lake Pointe property. It was
estimated that the refinancing would save the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment
Authority $176,000 in debt service. Staffrecommended Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-07.
9. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-08 PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $1,285,000 G.O.
REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 2004C.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the resolution authorized the sale of bonds for
refinancing of debt associated with the Locke Lake project and the construction of the Well
No. 12 filtration plant. The proceeds from the bond sale would be held until February,
2005, and then used to retire debt for bonds issued at a higher rate in 1996. This would
save $51,100. Staff recommended Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-08.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 6
10. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-09 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT, APPROVAL OF
PLANS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: SANITARY AND
STORM SEWER LINING PROJECT NO. 354.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the sanitary sewer project included the lining of
2,000 feet of corrugated metal pipe on West Moore Lake Drive, Marigold Terrace, Monroe
Street and 58th Avenue. The storm sewer project included the sealing of badly leaking
joints for the storm sewer on 75th Avenue, Hayes Street and Meadowmoor Drive. The
amount of $80,000 was budgeted from the Sewer Fund and $50,000 from the Storm Water
Fund. Staff recommended Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-09.
11. RECEIVE PROPOSAL AND AWARD CONTRACT TO BONESTROO, ROSENE,
ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES TO COMPLETE THE VULNERABILITY
ASSESSMENT AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR FRIDLEY'S WATER
SYSTEM.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the United States EPA mandated the preparation
and submittal of the plans by June 30, 2004. Staff recommended that Bonestroo, Rosene,
Anderlik & Associates be hired at a cost of $15,400 to complete the study and response
plan.
RECEIVED PROPOSAL AND AWARDED CONTRACT TO BONESTROO,
ROSENE, ANDERKIK & ASSOCIATES TO COMPLETE THE VULNERABILITY
ASSESSMENT AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR FRIDLEY'S WATER
SYSTEM.
12. APPROVE REVISED AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE
CITY OF FRIDLEY AND NEWQUIST & EKSTRUM, CHARTERED, AND CARL
J. NEWQUIST.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the Police Department recommended that the
subpoena service be moved to the City Prosecutor's office. This would cost about $12,000
per year. We would save $14,600 a year in personnel costs. Staff recommended Council's
approval.
APPROVED.
13. APPROVE 2004 ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
FRIDLEY AND BRIGHTON VETERINARY HOSPITAL.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the only change in the contract was the increase in
cost of services which would rise from $1,200 to $1,300 per month. The increase was
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 7
reasonable in view of the fact it had not been changed since 1997. The Police Department
was pleased with the quality of service. Staff recommended Council's approval.
APPROVED.
14. CLAIMS.
APPROVED CLAIM NOS. 114886 THROUGH 115143.
15. LICENSES.
APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE.
16. ESTIMATES.
APPROVED THE FOLLOWING ESTIMATE:
Creative Curb Contractors, LLC
64358 — 375th Street
Watkins, MN 55389
2003 Miscellaneous Concrete Repair
Proj ect No. 3 51
FINAL ESTIMATE:
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA.
Dr. Burns recommended approval of the consent agenda.
$ 6,101.52
Councilmember Bolkcom asked why there were so many outdoor storage special use permit
requests on the agenda.
Mr. Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said it related to the systematic inspection
process that was conducted over the last two years. The special use permit would legitimize
outdoor storage on a site and if the business operated under nine standards that were set by the City
Council.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adopt the proposed consent agenda as presented.
Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 8
ADOPTION OF AGENDA.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the agenda as presented. Seconded by
Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
OPEN FORUM:
Mr. Tim Byrne, 6053 Woody Lane N.E., read the following letter he had written to
Councilmember Wolfe.
Dear Mr. Wolfe:
Please consider making the following motion or resolution at the ne�t meeting of the
Fridley City CounciL Make a motion or resolution to temporarily ban all S-2 rezoning in
the City of Fridley effective immediately. The City Council should then establish a policy
on redevelopment based upon input from the citizens of Fridley and update the
Comprehensive Plan as necessary. This action was necessary because S-2 rezoning now
results in high density developments which are not consistent with our existing single
family home neighborhoods.
Mr. Byrne asked the City Attorney if Council had the authority to temporarily ban S-2 rezoning
until they could look at the Comprehensive Plan.
Attorney Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, said that Council could enact a moratorium on development
or certain kinds of development within the City for the purpose of reviewing the Comprehensive
Plan.
Mr. Byrne asked what kind of vote would be needed.
Attorney Knaak said a majority.
Mr. Byrne said Council was reacting to what the developers and City staff proposed. He thought
the elected officials should set the policy and City staff should carry it out.
Mayor Lund said the Comprehensive Plan was the guideline that was established.
Mr. Byrne asked if Council voted on it.
Mayor Lund said it was voted on.
Mr. Byrne said it was not a plan anymore but a policy. When they voted 4 to 1 on the project near
Sandee's, it went from being a plan to a policy.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 9
Mayor Lund said Mr. Byrne's points were well taken about the Comprehensive Plan. He said they
would address that in the future.
Mr. Byrne asked if it would be possible to set a date.
Mayor Lund said they are going to take a preliminary look at the issue at the Council's ne�t
conference meeting which was scheduled for Aprill9, 2004.
Mr. Bryne asked if the meeting was open to the public.
Mayor Lund said all meetings were open to the public. It was an informal discussion and they
would not be setting policy.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
17. CONSIDERATION OF THE 2004 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.
2004-1.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open
the public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Layne Otteson, Assistant Public Works Director, said the project was in the North Park
neighborhood. It included a residential area and a commercial area, which he outlined on a map.
The project was part of the annual street reconstruction program. They performed a condition
rating of the streets annually and this indicated what streets needed to be replaced. The City's
standards for streets included concrete curb and gutter and a standard driving width of 30 to 44 feet
which would be the width from the face of the curb on one side to the face of the curb on the other.
Residential streets were designed for 9 tons to accommodate buses and garbage trucks.
Commercial streets were designed for 11 tons. The streets were also designed to be higher in the
middle to improve drainage.
Mr. Otteson said the existing streets in the project area would be replaced with a new aggregate
base and a pavement surface. Existing bituminous curb would be replaced with new concrete curb
and gutters. Utilities would be reviewed and upgrades to such items as hydrants, sewer services,
sections of the sanitary sewer main, storm sewer inlets and piping would be considered. Steep and
flat driveways would also be taken into consideration. On University Avenue, decorative fencing
would be installed on the east side from 61st Avenue to Mississippi Street. It would be similar to
the fencing installed in the Gateway East area. Bids would be opened in March, construction
would begin in May, and construction should be completed in October. In November, a public
hearing would be held to set the assessment. The assessments would start in January, 2005.
Mr. Otteson said the reconstruction project had several issues. The first issue was project
communication with the residents. At the beginning of the project, they met with the residents and
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 10
a project letter was sent out that outlined who the contractor was for the project, when the project
would begin, where construction would begin, safety, and other issues. They also provided a list
of contacts and telephone numbers. The mail boxes were moved out of the way of construction.
Sometimes they were relocated together near the beginning of the construction site. Other issues
that came up included landscaping, sprinklers, driveway restoration, and sewer service repairs.
They would make sure that daily access was provided.
Mr. Otteson said the residential assessment policy was based on the length of the adjusted front
footage. The adjusted front footage was measured across the property at a distance of 35 feet from
the front property line, on the address side. All work associated with the installation of concrete
curb was assessed. If it already existed on the address side of the property, there would be no
assessment. Residential assessment costs would be no more than $16 per foot for the concrete
curb. All construction costs in commercial projects were 100 percent assessable to the fronting
properties. Properties on both sides of the reconstructed street shared the cost based on a fifty-fifty
split. The City would pay for the University Avenue side. Assessments were estimated to be
$65.00 per front foot of property. The assessment could be paid with a lump sum payment within
thirty days of the assessment hearing after construction, or the assessment could be added to the
property taxes paid over ten years with an interest rate of approximately 6.5 percent. There was
another option available to senior citizens meeting certain criteria and that was to request to have
the assessment deferred until the future sale of the property. Interest would accrue until the sale.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to receive a letter from the Reverend Joseph Whalen,
Pastor, Church of St. William, dated January 23, 2004, objecting to the project. Seconded by
Councilmember Bolkcom.
Councilmember Barnette said he thought church property was tax exempt. He asked if that was
true for assessments.
Mr. Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director, said assessments were different than taxes.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there would be an assessment hearing in the fall.
Mr. Haukaas agreed.
Mr. Rex Friesleben, 5540 Regis Trail N.E., asked if the street material would be hot rolled asphalt
or oil and gravel.
Mr. Otteson said it would be hot rolled asphalt.
Mr. Friesleben said his property had a retaining wall going to the street. He asked how that would
be handled.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 11
Mr. Otteson said when the landscaping was done in the boulevard, they looked at retaining walls
and tried to protect them. If it was necessary, they required the contractor to restore them to as
good as new or better.
Mr. Friesleben asked about shrubs and trees.
Mr. Otteson said they tried to avoid shrubs, trees and landscaping. They tried to avoid anything in
the boulevard area because that increased the costs of the project.
Mr. Haukaas said on the construction projects, they would look at the impact with respect to the
landscaping. If they felt that the tree had a chance of dying because of the project and it was a tree
in the boulevard and the City's right of way, they would first approach the resident and explain the
situation. In that kind of a situation, they would not put a tree back in the boulevard but might give
the resident an option of having the tree planted in the yard. They did not restore trees to the right-
of-way.
Mayor Lund asked if Mr. Friesleben was in favor of the project.
Mr. Friesleben said he was.
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember
Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to receive the letter written by Mr. Tim Byrne. Seconded by
Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
18. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 205 OF THE
FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO S-3, ONAWAY DISTRICT,
SCREENING OF SOLID WASTE (CONTINUED NOVEMBER 24, 2003).
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to reopen the public hearing which had been continued at
the November 24, 2003, City Council meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said this was a continuation of a public
hearing on an ordinance to provide relief from dumpster screening requirements in the Onaway
District. The change in the code would not require screening of solid waste containers located in
the Onaway District. During their systematic sweep of the Onaway District, staff identified unique
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 12
hardships for the Onaway businesses regarding the screening of solid waste due to alleyways and
power lines. Meetings were held with business owners in November and December, 2002, to
develop a solution. He said the Onaway District went from Main Street to the rail lines, north of
77tn Avenue and south of 81st Avenue. Power lines run throughout the district and which made it
difficult to lift dumpsters overhead. The change also attempted to eliminate situations where there
were dumpsters in the alleys. The ordinance specifically addressed where the dumpsters could be
placed. Dumpsters would now need to be within five feet of the building. Staff recommended
approval of the proposed changes to the screening of solid waste requirements in the S-3, Onaway
District. The proposed changes allowed Onaway District industries that did not have site
conditions to accommodate a solid waste enclosure to be in compliance with the Fridley City
Code. Notices were sent to the businesses in the Onaway District.
Councilmember Barnette said the businesses in the Onaway District were notified. He asked if
they received a good response from the business owners.
Mr. Hickok said they had a good turnout at both meetings. There was much support and they were
enthusiastic about the fact that the City helped them find a creative solution to this problem.
Councilmember Bolkcom said the hearing was continued because they wanted to make sure that
the Onaway District business owners were notified. She asked if they had heard from anyone.
Mr. Hickok said they had not heard anything about the notices that were sent out. They did have
continuing discussions about special use permits.
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.
OLD BUSINESS:
19. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 205 OF THE
FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO S-3, ONAWAY DISTRICT,
SCREENING OF SOLID WASTE (TABLED NOVEMBER 24, 2003).
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first
reading. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 13
20. ORDINANCE NO. 1184 TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS
(REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #03-02, BY TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT
(WARD 2).
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to waive the reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1184 on
second reading. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there had been any changes to any of the stipulations.
Mr. Hickok said there had not. He said there was a clarification on Stipulation No. 1 just so that it
was clear that what was approved was the three-story design as opposed to the four-story design.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE,
COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING AYE AND
COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED ON A 4 TO 1 VOTE.
NEW BUSINESS:
21. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-24, BY WALLBOARD, INC., TO
ALLOW LIMITED OUTDOOR STORAGE IN A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING
DISTRICT, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5346 INDUSTRIAL BOULEVARD N.E.
(WARD 3).
Mr. Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said the request was for a special use permit
to allow limited outdoor storage in the side and rear yards at Wallboard, Inc., 5346 Industrial
Boulevard N.E. The petitioner wanted to store steel studs and other accessories related to the
building trade which were used for the business. The property was zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial.
The City Code allowed limited outdoor storage in the industrial districts with a special use permit
as long as nine specific code requirements were met. Those specific requirements related to
height, screening, parking, amount of outdoor storage, and the types of materials allowed to be
stored outside. Petitioner asked to be allowed to continue the existing outdoor activity on the
property. Drywall, insulation and other building materials were stored inside. Steel studs and
other accessories related to the building trade were stored outside. The perimeter of the property
was fenced and landscaped. The petitioner planned on installing slats in the existing cyclone fence
to meet the outdoor storage screening requirement.
Mr. Hickok said the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this request on January 7,
2004. During the public hearing, Petitioner stated that when she bought the property in 1994, she
received a letter from the City which stated that outdoor storage could not exceed 15 feet in height.
The existing outdoor storage on her site was 15 feet in height and she was unable to meet the 12
foot height requirement. The letter she received from the City stated that material, motor vehicles,
and equipment could not exceed 15 feet in height for incidental outdoor storage. The outdoor
storage on this property has never been incidental. In order for the Petitioner to exceed the 12-foot
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 14
height requirement for outdoor storage, a variance would need to be granted. The Planning
Commission recommended approval with the following six stipulations:
1. The petitioner shall be responsible for screening the limited outdoor storage area in order to
comply with code requirements by August 1, 2004.
2. Outdoor storage cannot exceed 12 feet in height or exceed 50% of the principal building's
footprint.
3. Petitioner to provide the City staff with a site plan showing the outdoor storage locations
prior to the City Council meeting of January 26, 2004.
4. Trailers located outside the existing fence and within the public right-of-way shall be
removed.
5. No outdoor storage other than the storage of items used for this business.
6. The petitioner shall apply for a variance within 60 days of approval of this special use
permit request or comply with the 12 foot height requirement for outdoor storage.
Staff recommended Council's approval.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked about incidental storage.
Mr. Hickok said required outdoor storage meant you needed to be in the M-3 District. Incidental
storage was what happened in the M-2 District. Incidental storage may be temporary outdoor
storage before it was moved indoors. Required storage was outdoor storage until it was sent to
where it was headed. The M-3 code that created outdoor intensive storage was revised in 1992.
The subject property was purchased in 1994 and the building was built in 1996.
Councilmember Bolkcom said the code was revised before the property was purchased. She asked
if the trailers that were outside of the fence got moved in and were considered part of the storage
would they have to be included in the 50 percent.
Mr. Hickok said some trailers come and go and that would be incidental. The trailers at this
location have been sitting outside the fence for some time. It appeared to be required storage as
opposed to an incidental use. It would need to be confined to the 50 percent footprint area of the
building. If the business constantly required storage of outdoor material, then it was an M-3 use.
It was outdoor intensive and needed to be elsewhere. In an incidental use, you might see materials
outside on occasion, but they were not required to be outdoors in order to make the business thrive.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there was enough room to build another building.
Mr. Hickok said they probably were going to add on to the building and do some repositioning and
racking. Their favorite option would be to have the building expand and all of the materials kept
inside.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 15
Councilmember Bolkcom said one of the stipulations for this special use permit request said there
had to be a variance. She asked what happened if there was a variance request and it was denied.
The stipulation said the petitioner had to apply for a variance within 60 days or comply with the
12- foot height requirement.
Mr. Hickok said the intent was to follow the 12-foot height unless they are granted a variance. The
time frame was meant to give them a time certain to apply for the variance. If the variance was
denied, they have a special use permit with a 12-foot height standard. The special use permit
would not be in jeopardy.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Attorney Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, if he was in agreement.
Attorney Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, said they would be granting a special use permit for the 12-
foot height. If they were successful in obtaining a variance, the terms of the special use permit
would still apply. If the special use permit was 12 feet, even if they had a variance for more than
that, they would not be able to expand it beyond what the special use permit allowed unless there
was an amendment to the special use permit as well. Depending on how it was worded, it would
have to be an either/or format. The permit itself would have to say either a 12-foot limitation or 15
feet if a variance was granted.
Mr. Hickok said Attorney Knaak was correct and it was staff's intention that if the variance of 15
feet was granted, they would asked Council at that time to recognize that and would have a
separate action before Council to modify the special use permit to include the 15-foot height.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked why a stipulation was included that was unclear.
Mr. Hickok said they could just grant the 12-foot high special use permit and have the variance
request separate.
Ms. Patti Paraschuk, 5346 Industrial Boulevard N.E., owner of Wallboard, Inc., said the company
was over 40 years old and she had owned it since 1984. They had previously been in north
Minneapolis for 28 years. Prior to buying the land in Fridley, she spoke with Barbara Dacy and
showed her exactly what they planned to do at the new location and invited her to see their old
location, which she did. Based on that, she received a letter of approval from Ms. Dacy. She
purchased the land in November of 1994. She went ahead with the building and as the letter stated
there was a 15-foot limitation for outdoor storage. She did not know there were any other
stipulations until 2003 when she found out about the stipulations that stated 12-feet heights for
outdoor storage plus 50 percent of the building's footprint. She had based her business on the
letter dated April, 1994. She said they could not change what they had. Their racking was 15 feet
and the trucks were over 13 feet. Staff recommended the racks of steel be put in one area. That
would be impossible, because they needed a radius for the forklift to move it. There were 15 to 20
semi-trucks delivering every day. They had to be able to go around the building and turn. If they
filled the space, no one would be able to deliver to them. They could not take the product off the
racks because they had no place to put it and they could not congest it into one location because
there would be no room for the trucks. The trailers were outside, but they were used to deliver.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 16
She could not conduct her business with the limitations first given to her in 2003. She said she did
not want to move out of the City. It would be an expensive proposition and they liked the location
and loved the access to the freeway.
Mayor Lund said Ms. Paraschuk was asking for the 15-foot variance and had a problem with the
second stipulation which restricted the business to 50 percent of the principal building's footprint.
Ms. Paraschuk agreed.
Mayor Lund asked if Ms. Paraschuk had a problem with any of the other stipulations.
Ms. Paraschuk not to her knowledge.
Ms. Bolkcom asked if they had granted anything like this and if there was a solution to the
problem.
Mr. Hickok said as part of the systematic process an ordinance was adopted to loosen up the
outdoor storage requirements. Prior to that, this site would not have been entitled to outdoor
storage except for incidental. When an amendment to the ordinance was adopted, it allowed a very
generous provision that 50 percent of the principal building's footprint could be allowed for
outdoor storage.
Ms. Paraschuk said the inventory on the back of the buildings was on racks. There were always
delays in construction. Sometimes a job was delayed two weeks, a month or even two months.
They might already have the product ordered and there was nothing they could do about it except
keep it there until it went back out. Their merchandise had a minimum of twelve turns per year
and possibly 15 to 20. The inventory was not there long, but they had to have all of it. That was
how they did business.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if any guidelines were given to people in a M-2 or other district
when they applied for a building permit.
Mr. Hickok said he did not remember a time when an industrial owner came straight to the permit
counter and received a permit. Typically they visited with staff and were given a packet of
material on what the district was and what the district allowed. He said they had a developer
review committee meeting in which staff from Engineering, the Police Department, the Planning
Department, the Assessing Division and any other division of the City met to look at the different
aspects of the project.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they had reviewed the history of this business.
Mr. Hickok said they reviewed the entire history. What was stated to Ms. Paraschuk as she was
looking at the site was that the site allowed incidental outdoor storage and it could only occur if it
was behind the building, could not be seen from the public right-of-way, and was truly incidental.
At that time, it could not exceed 15 feet in height.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 17
Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the trailers. The staff report indicated that the trailers do set
outside the storage area for some time. They do not always move in and out as Ms. Paraschuk
suggested.
Ms. Paraschuk said she could not tell on a daily basis, but out of the 15 trailers they had, most
would be in and out all day long.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked why the trailers were outside the fenced in area.
Ms. Paraschuk said it was easier to load and unload them. She said she did not apply for a permit.
The contractor did. If the contractor received the information, she was unaware of it.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Knaak if it was ultimately the responsibility of the owner of a
property to understand what the uses were for the property and how they maintained the property.
Attorney Knaak said yes.
Ms. Paraschuk said she agreed with that and thought she was.
Councilmember Wolfe said when the ordinance was passed, they did not see every situation. To
change it would be frustrating to him because he knew what she would have to do.
Ms. Paraschuk said it was an impossibility. She could not congest everything into one location.
Councilmember Billings asked if the ordinance spelled out the 50 percent requirement, or if it was
just staffs' interpretation.
Mr. Hickok said the ordinance said the storage area could not exceed 50 percent of the floor area
of the principal building. It was staffs' interpretation that it would be floor area of 50 percent of
the building size. The intent of the ordinance was to give 50 percent of the floor area of the
building behind the building so that it could be contained in the screening area. In this case, the
materials were spread out throughout the yard and could not be contained effectively with the gates
opened and closed. It if was behind the building and screened properly, the gates could be opened
and closed without the view of the stacks and piles of materials in the yard.
Councilmember Billings said the spirit of the code would not be violated if someone had an area
that was 25% covered and was screened and had another area that was 25% covered and screened
separately.
Mr. Hickok said it had to be evaluated on a site-by-site basis and the intent was to give an outdoor
storage opportunity without giving the appearance of an industrial site or neighborhood. He said
Councilmember Billings' suggestion was possible. Breaking it down beyond that would create a
yard. It was no longer 25% and 25%. It was 4% here, 8% here, 12% here, and 10% here and soon
the 50% disappears. It would be impossible from an enforcement perspective to keep track of
what was on the site.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 18
Councilmember Billings said that it did not have to be all 50 percent contiguous. There could be
multiple large areas designated as outdoor storage. At the same time, there could not be so many
little storage areas that are divided by drive aisles that the whole thing became a storage yard.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Ms. Paraschuk if they could confine it to two areas, screen it, keep
the fence closed and keep the trailers inside.
Ms. Paraschuk said that keeping the fence closed during the day would be impossible. Trucks
were going through the area all day long. They would keep the gates closed off hours.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if instead of one area of 50%, if they could have two storage areas
and screen them so they were not spread out over the whole yard.
Ms. Paraschuk said they had various lengths of steel studs. It would not be possible to put them all
together. They had them on racks. Space was needed for the forklift to turn around, pick the
product up and put it on the trucks.
Councilmember Barnette asked if there was some way, whether through special use permit or a
variance to accommodate the business.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if her business had increased. She was concerned about
businesses expanding well beyond what they started out to be.
Councilmember Wolfe said they have been without problems for 10 years, and now there was a
problem.
Councilmember Bolkcom said that they needed to discuss this further.
Councilmember Wolfe said that decisions might have been made without knowing the whole
situation.
Councilmember Barnette wanted to find a way to keep the company in Fridley.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said it seemed like there were three options. One would be a
zoning te�t amendment regarding outdoor storage. The second would be whatever variance was
required to accommodate the request. The third would be a rezoning, although spot rezoning was
probably out of the question.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they could ask for an e�tension of time. If possible, she would
like staff to look at this matter further.
Councilmember Barnette asked what a zoning text amendment required and if it would amount to
spot rezoning.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 19
Mr. Hickok said that in this case, a zoning te�t amendment would be te�t amendment to have the
Council re-evaluate whether 50 percent was the appropriate amount of site coverage or whether
some other percentage would be appropriate. It would not apply just to this site but to the
industrial district universally.
Councilmember Barnette asked if this could cause problems.
Mr. Hickok said it could. He said they studied what was happening elsewhere and 50 percent was
as generous as any other community was giving. If a variance was granted, they would need to be
very specific about what the characteristics of this site are that made it necessary here but nowhere
else, or there may be problems with other businesses. He thought it would be difficult to find the
unique characteristics about the site other than the way they have chosen to operate that would
make a variance applicable. He did not know if there were a lot of choices other than to grant or
not grant the special use permit. The petitioner said the gates needed to be open, which was a
problem. If that was intended to be the screening, 50 percent of the floor area of the building
somewhere on the site needed to be screened so that the gate could be opened and it was still
screened when you looked into the site. There was always the quiet neighbor that you could not
forget about. There was the industrial property owner who had built an impeccable industrial
property and based their choice and design standards based on what the ordinance required. If they
picked a spot because outdoor storage would not be a problem in the neighborhood only to have
outdoor storage prevail, there could be a problem.
Mayor Lund asked if Ms. Paraschuk had thoroughly researched the options. He said he did not
know if the 15-feet height was a problem because he did not hear a lot of negative discussion about
getting a variance from 12 to 15 feet. It sounded like the bigger issue was getting it condensed to
50 percent of the footprint of the building.
Ms. Paraschuk agreed. She said she did not know that was a requirement.
Mayor Lund said he understood that there was e�tenuating circumstances and Council did want to
be amenable. However, staff needed to have some type of clear direction as to how it should be
enforced. He agreed with Councilmember Bolkcom that this should be continued.
Councilmember Billings said he disagreed with continuing it because whether a variance was
granted in the future or whether there was an amendment to the zoning te�t, a special use permit
still needed to be granted. A zoning te�t amendment and a variance were two separate processes.
He suggested issuing the special use permit.
Councilmember Bolkcom said Petitioner said she did not understand that it had to be 50 percent
storage in one area. She suggested continuing this matter so that staff could meet with Petitioner
and discuss this further and look at alternatives or approving the special use permit and allowing
Petitioner to work with staff.
Councilmember Billings said if the special use permit was granted, Petitioner would have the
opportunity to work with staff. If she could not work anything out with staff, she had storage in 50
percent of the building's footprint.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 20
Mr. Hickok mentioned Stipulation No. 3.
Councilmember Billings said that Stipulation No. 3 would go away when they voted on it.
Mayor Lund said the special use permit was granted and Petitioner could not meet the
requirements, at what point would it be enforced.
Councilmember Bolkcom said she would need to apply for a variance right away if the special use
permit was approved. It would be handled like any other special use permit. They would get a
certain amount of time and would get a notice and if they could not comply and would be back
before Council.
Mayor Lund said it was his understanding that as long as Petitioner was trying to get a variance of
some sort , she would not be found in violation.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve Special Use Permit Request, SP #03-24, by
Wallboard, Inc. Seconded by Councilmember Billings.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to amend the stipulations for Special Use Permit Request,
SP #03-24, by Wallboard, Inc., as follows:
1. The petitioner shall be responsible for screening the limited outdoor storage area in order to
comply with code requirements by August 1, 2004.
2. Outdoor storage cannot exceed 12 feet in height or exceed 50% of the principal building's
footprint except as may be modified by variance approval.
3. Trailers located outside the existing fence and within the public right-of-way shall be
removed.
4. No outdoor storage other than the storage of items used for this business.
5. The petitioner shall, within ninety (90) days of approval of the special use permit, comply
with the height requirements for outdoor storage.
Seconded by Councilmember Billings.
UPON A VOICE VOTE ON THE MOTION TO AMEND THE STIPULATIONS TO
SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #03-24, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
UPON A VOICE VOTE ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL USE PERMIT
REQUEST, SP #03-24, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2004 PAGE 21
22. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS.
Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the Community Development Director would like to
discuss the Community Development Block Grant application.
Dr. Burns said the latest newsletter should be delivered on or before February 10, 2004.
Councilmember Bolkcom would like to discuss a transportation issue.
Mayor Lund said the 2"d annual StarGazers at Fridley would be held Saturday and Sunday,
February 21 and 22, 2004.
Mayor Lund said the City's Winterfest would be held on Saturday, January 31. Activities would
be held at the Springbrook Nature Center, Commons Park and the Fridley Community Center.
Mayor Lund said the City had received a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial
Reporting for the year 2002.
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn the City Council meeting. Seconded by
Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED.
Respectfully submitted,
Roberta S. Collins
Secretary
������
Scott J. Lund
Mayor