The URL can be used to link to this page

06/13/2005 - 6087� f � � CffY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 ?:30 p.m. - City Council Chambers Attendance Sheet Please �rint name. address and item number vou are interested in. Priat`` Name f Clearly) Address ` �tem No. ' 1 -� ��, -� S�" .� 1 S r�i'�- � �' � J�� C� �. � � ��S �l �,; ,, t,��- 6� �bt,� S�r,� �i� � . � �---z. i 3 �� . �v�.,�. �-, �� s �� - N c� r �,4.,� T � ► 3 � � � � � � Y�- � ,�f � � 1 �- � s � .� � �� ; ��c� s�,f _ /v� � � �S ' �'�c� � �� ? � �t � o.�"b -� l � /� � �� ` l % ! 7 �v �/ ' -Q `_C_ � � �� ;� 4� � 0� -�- I ��f� e � 15 ti-� �, -� � ��. r.�. �.�, �� b � .,� i � �,r�.? � � � ;; o.v /�'�/� � � " G�� 1� j/ 9/ � � 5 l �- (,� � � CffY OF FRIDLE1f FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 7:30 p.m. — City Council Chambers Attendance Sheet Please �rint name, address and item number vou are interested in. Print' Nam�e early) Address ' Ite�rt No. � � . � � '� � � , � ` �es�� 1�1�3 ��i �— � �-c� R � � 7 � � /� �� l �� I5 i�� '/z �Av� �f� I�o �u,� ��,� I� ��z .� ✓.� � �� r � -� � � l 3 3S S a��'`�� .0 �'-'�-.�� ` , � ��D Gf Vr /� ,¢�. .�`. ,1 `. s�J �' - �� 1arc� ��.�S%P�'✓ ��i K��cc C/'��v`f � ` �f�-��i�U� i-E '�J.�p� 13S !�'T7�TZt�a1�� CG�f✓�} �0�'�`j5�' �� 7 � �%�Ce ��ec,� %e✓c� �� x� a �� ,�� , ��,� ,�,� j � �� ,�� .� .� � ��, � �� _ - 7�.. �.��5�, � �'c.�� '�`- �3 ��.`� ��w � � CffY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 7:30 p.m. — City Council Chambers Attendance Sheet Please �rint name. address and item number vou are interested in. Priut Name tClearlp) Address I�em No. -, � � � � ��73 � Y��1 �-�d" ,:=�'f%, 1.5�— � � � ; � �� , � c- � -�-�---�� s 3� S / � . v�.,- - � � a �i � -�l�J �,, �� r�� ✓� !f—l� !�'rr� 1/C'if'1 /��f �`S�P� /�l7S 73; � A v�e , /J � �� /6 c2 � � U � c -7�,2� Riv - �`7 � � �ffY �F FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 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 acrivities because of race, color, creed, religion, narional origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, seaual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activiries. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PRESENTATION OF VALUES FIRST 2005 COMMUNITY RECOGNITION AWARDS Individual: Youth: Business: Community Organization: High School Sportsmanship Gretchen Hanson James Baker Joe DiMaggio's Banfill-Locke Center for the Arts Amy Lindstrom Stashie Mack APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of May 23, 2005 NEW BUSINESS: Extension of Preliminary Plat Request, PS #03-18, by Town Center Development, Generally Located at 1282 Mississippi Street and 6490 Central Avenue N. E. (Ward 2) ........................................................... 1- 2 2. Approve Metropolitan Council Section 8 Housing Assistance Program Contract for Administrative Services between the City of Fridley and the Metropolitan Council ............................................................... 3- 18 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 3. Approve the Anoka County Community Development Block Grant Program Agreement between the City of Fridley and the County of Anoka ................................................................... 19 - 44 4. Resolution Calling for a Public Hearing on Modifications to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1-3, 6-7 and 9-17, Creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 18 and Approval and Adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan Relating Thereto ........................................................................................ 45 - 49 5. Resolution Authorizing Final Changes in Appropriations for the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds and Capital Improvement Fund for the Year Ended 2004 ......................................... 50 - 54 6. Motion Withholding Sale of Tax Forfeit Land Identified in Anoka County PIN No. 24-30-24-31-0111 and Directing Staff to Initiate a Request for an Application to Acquire a Tax Forfeit Parcel for Right-of-Way Purposes (Generally Located at the Corner of Regis Lane and Fillmore Street) (Ward 2) ......................................................... 55 7. Appointments — City Employees ........................................................................ 56 8. Claims ....................................................................................................... 57 9. Licenses ....................................................................................................... 58 - 59 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 10. Estimates ....................................................................................................... 60 ADOPTION OF AGENDA. OPEN FORUM (VISITORS): Consideration of Items not on Agenda — 15 Minutes PUBLIC HEARING: 11. Rezoning Request, ZOA #05-02, by Family Lifestyle Development Corporation, to Rezone Property from C-1, Local Business, C-2, General Business, and R-1, Single Family Residential, to S-2, Redevelopment District, Generally Located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, and 6421, 6441, and 6461 Central Avenue N. E. (Ward 2) ....................................................................................................... 61 - 78 OLD BUSINESS: 12. Second Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by Making a Change in Zoning Districts (Rezoning Request, ZOA #05-01 by Har-Mar Incorporated, for Property Generally Located at 7110-90 University Avenue N.E.) (Ward 3) ....................................................................................................... 79 - 80 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 PAGE 4 NEW BUSINESS: 13. Resolution Eliminating Four Special Use Permits for the Property at 7110 — 7190 University Avenue, Legally Described as Lots 4-6, Block 1, Paco Industrial Park, Except the North 35 Feet of Lots 4, Anoka County, Minnesota (Ward 3) ........................................................ 81 - 82 14. Approve Liquor License to Greg Asproth for Billiard Street Cafe, Generally Located at 7178 University Avenue N.E. (Ward 3) .............................................................. 83 15. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-02, by Family Lifestyle Development Corporation, to Create One Parcel Out of Five, Generally Located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street, and 6421, 6441 and 6461 Central Avenue N. E. (Ward 2) ....................................................................................................... 84 - 97 16. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-03, by Timothy Van Auken, to Subdivide Two Multi-Family Lots, Generally Located at 1475 and 1485 — 73rd Avenue N. E. (Ward 2) ..................................................... 98 - 104 17. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Fridley City Charter, Chapter 7, Taxes, Section 7.03.A, Pertaining to Utility Fees .......................................................... 105 - 109 18. Resolution Supporting the Improvements to Springbrook Nature Center Associated with the SPRING (Sanctuary Protection & Renewal into the Next Generation) Project and Supporting the Request to the State of Minnesota for Financial Assistance....................................................................................................... 110 - 116 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 PAGE 5 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 19. Receive Proposal and Award Contract for the Installation of Redi/Volt Surge Protection Devices to Wells 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 and 12 ......................................................... 117 - 119 20. Informal Status Reports ..................................................................................... 120 ADJOURN. CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY MAY 23, 2005 The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund Councilmember-at-Large Barnette Councilmember Billings Councilmember Bolkcom MEMBERS ABSENT: Councilmember Wolfe OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager Fritz Knaak, City Attorney Richard Pribyl, Finance Director Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Rebecca Brazys, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: • Approval of Board of Review minutes of May 9, 2005. APPROVED. • Approval of the minutes of the City Council meeting of May 9, 2005. Councilmember Barnette requested a correction on Page 8, second paragraph, correcting the food to liquor sales ratio. APPROVED. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Approve Agreement Amendment for Curbside Recycling Services. Dr. Burns, City Manager, explained that Allied Waste Industries, the parent company of BFI Waste Systems since 1999, has requested that the City amend their agreement FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 23, 2005 PAGE 2 with BFI in a manner that changes their name to Allied Waste Services of North America, LLC. Nothing else is being changed. Staff recommends Council's approval. APPROVED. 2. Resolution Authorizing Execution of Amendment No. 1 to Grant Agreement with the MPCA for Springbrook Watershed Implementation Project Phase II CWP Grant Project. Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated this resolution requests a one-year extension of the City's Clean Water Partnership Implementation Grant for the Springbrook Nature Center. This extension will enable the City to use grant funding for related expenditures that arise after May 29, 2005. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-22. 3. Resolution Providing for the Issuance and Sale of $1,835,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005A, Pledging for the Security Thereof Special Assessments, and Levying a Tax for the Payment Thereof. Dr. Burns, City Manager, explained that Council authorized the sale of these bonds at their April 25 meeting. The bonds will be used to pay for those portions of the 2005 street improvement project that are not being paid for by State aid or property owner assessments. The City has maintained an Aa1 bond rating for this sale. Ehlers and Associates, Inc., conducted the sale of these bonds on the City's behalf. The successful bidder was Wells Fargo Brokerage Services LLC at a"True Interest Rate" of 3.5483%. Staff recommends Council's approval of the bond sale to the successful bidder. The bonds will be amortized over ten years, with annual debt service cost ranging from $214,822.50 to $217,875. The debt service will be added to the City's annual property tax levy. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-23. 4. Resolution Providing for the Issuance and Sale of $4,680,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2005B and Pledging for the Security Thereof Tax Increments. Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated this sale was authorized by Council at their April 25 meeting. This is a refunding issue for outstanding Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) bonds that were issued for past redevelopment projects. The bids for the bonds were sold on the City's behalf by Ehlers and Associates, Inc. The successful bidder was First Trust Portfolios L.P. at a"True Interest Rate" of 2.9579%. The bonds are paid for from the proceeds of the HRA's tax increment districts and will be amortized over a period of 3'/ years at an annual cost ranging from $1,177,480.83 to $1,291,650.00. The HRA will realize an annual savings of $158,000 as a result of this refunding bond issue. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 23, 2005 PAGE 3 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-24. 5. Resolution in Support of an Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for Spring Lake Park Lions Club (Sandee's Restaurant, 6490 Central Avenue N.E.) (Ward 2). Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated this is a two-year renewal of a license that expires on July 31, 2005. City Staff contacted both the Minnesota Department of Public Safety and the Minnesota Gambling Control Board as part of the City's application review. Neither organization had any problems with the application. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-25. 6. Resolution Accepting a Stipulation for Out-of-Court Settlement with Lawrence A. Chubb. Dr. Burns, City Manager, explained the settlement is relevant to a Worker's Compensation claim filed by Lawrence A. Chubb. Since the City was insured for these claims by Home Insurance Company at the time of Officer Chubb's injury and since Home Insurance Company has filed bankruptcy and is in liquidation, City staff and legal counsel recommend that Council accept an out-of-court settlement in this matter. They further recommend that Council accept the "Stipulation of Settlement" dated May 13, 2005, in the amount of $55,000 in full, final and complete settlement of any and all Worker's Compensation claims arising out of Mr. Chubb's work-related injury of October 8, 1985, with the exception of future medical expenses which are deemed reasonable and necessary as stipulated in the settlement agreement. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-26 7. Claims (121591-121736) APPROVED. 8. Licenses APPROVED AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. Councilmember Bolkcom questioned the status of the liquor license request for Billiard Street Cafe. Mr. Pribyl explained that the liquor license request will come before Council after the property rezoning has been approved. The second reading for that rezoning is scheduled for June 13, 2005. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 23, 2005 PAGE 4 MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom, to approve the consent agenda as presented. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom, to adopt the agenda as presented. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM (VISITORS): Consideration of items not on agenda — 15 minutes. No comments were made. NEW BUSINESS: 9. Resolution Approving a Minor Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CP #05- 01, by Har-Mar Incorporated for Property Located on Lots 4-6, Block 1, Paco Industrial Park, Except the North 35 Feet of Lot 4, Generally Located at 7110-90 University Avenue NE (Ward 3). 10. First Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by Making a Change in Zoning Districts (Rezoning Request, ZOA #05-01, by Har-Mar Incorporated, for Property Generally Located at 7110-90 University Avenue NE) (Ward 3). Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated petitioner would like to rezone this property from M-1, Light Industrial, to C-2, General Business. The purpose of this rezoning is to allow Billiard Street Cafe to obtain a liquor license. The Comprehensive Plan amendment is necessary because the property is currently zoned as industrial which matches the Comprehensive Plan designation. He reviewed the location of the property just north of Community Park along the west side of University Avenue. Staff did a site zoning analysis and determined that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the current uses at the building. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the property along the University Avenue corridor but is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan which is the reason it needs to be amended. As far as the Comprehensive Plan analysis, there will be no impact on the Metropolitan systems; it does not change the service boundary, timing of urban staging, wastewater treatment or discharge to more than one interceptor. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MAY 23, 2005 PAGE 5 MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Billings, to adopt Resolution No. 2005-27. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first reading. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. Informal Status Report Dr. Burns stated the June newsletter should be in the residents' mailboxes the first week in June. ADJOURN MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom, to adjourn. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:50 PM. Respectfully submitted by, Rebecca Brazys Scott J. Lund Recording Secretary Mayor ' TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT LLC � City af Fridley � Scott Hickok — Director or Community Development 6431 University Avenue NE . Fridley> MN 55432 : � May 16, 2005 Re; 6490 Central Avenue/Sandee's Dear Scott: , As you aware, the proceedings regarding Town Center Development, LLC's purchase of fhe ' above mentioned property are taking ion.ger to complefe than anticipated. The case is currently being heard in`court with testimony being given by both sides. We are nearing the end of the trial and moving closer to the Court's decision: However, we cannot guarantee that there will not be further.delays regarding this issue. Therefiore, we are requesting that the City of Fridley exfend , our closing deadline by six (6) rnonths, or until the end of December 2005. We are moving forward with the work required to get the final plat approved by The.City of , n Fridley. It is currently in the review process at the County, 6ut the time needed for their review, coupled with the engineer's time to complete the mylars exceeds the deadline for The City of ,- Fridfey's.May 23, 2005 meeting. This delay puts us into June; with our current deadline with The Gity being the end of June - another reason for our reguested six (6) month exfension. . Thank you for your consideration in extending our closing deadline, and for understanding our continued interesf in moving forward with this project Please contact either,one of us at 763-416- 0002 with any questions. We look forward to your response regarding our requested extension. Sincer , • : �� ;. Dave Rei _ Richard Whinnery , 13750 Reimer Dr. • Maple Grove, MN 55311 • 763-416-0002 • Fax: 763-420-6831 : _ > 2 � � CffY DF FRIDLEY DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 June 8, 2005 William W. Burns, City Manager Scott J. Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Pat Wolfe, Section 8 Housing Coordinator Section 8 Contract Extension M-05-42 INTRODUCTION In January 2000, the City of Fridley and the Metropolitan Council entered into a contractual agreement for provision of Section 8 Administrative services. The contract expiration date was to be June 1, 2004. On June 30, 2004, the Metropolitan Council contacted staff and asked to extend the contract through the end of the year (December 1, 2004). An additional extension was then requested to allow time for evaluation of the terms of the contract and to allow continued service that would be covered by a contract while our negotiations proceeded. Attached you will find the product of those negotiations and a contract that is ready to be reviewed and approved if Council concurs with staff's recommendation. If approved, the term of this contract will run through June 30, 2010. ELEMENTS Negotiations for a new contract were anticipated to occur in the last quarter of last year. However, budget concerns nationwide and in particular with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) caused authorities to need additional time to work out the terms of the contracts between the fund distribution agencies (Met Council) and administrators who deliver the services (Wolfe/Saefke/City). Consequently, negotiations between the Metropolitan Council and the City were stalled as the Metropolitan Council analyzed elements of the Section 8 delivery of services they administer. At one point it even appeared as though the Metropolitan Council would pass their administrative role on to Counties, rather than administering the federal funds as they are currently. They've finally gotten through their analysis and have determined that they will continue administering the federal Section 8 program. As a result they were ready to renegotiate contracts with their service providers like the City of Fridley. Attached for your convenience is the contract extension language that has been provided by the Metropolitan Council and is recommended for approval by our staff. CHANGES OVER PREVIOUS CONTRACT LANGUAGE The changes over previous year's contracts were few in number, but each carried impacts that needed to be evaluated. These changes were: 1. The Metropolitan Council chose to administer all aspects of the Section 8 Family Self- Sufficiency program. Fridley currently performs the recertification and inspections for Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS). Our choice would have been to administer the FSS participants. Primarily because we have a solid grasp on rent reasonableness in our community and believe by having the current FSS participants and new FSS applicants administered by Metro staff we will experience inconsistencies with rent structures. We currently have Pat Wolfe administering the HCV Program in Fridley in addition Metro HRA has staff administering special programs within ourjurisdiction and with FSS there will be a third staff person administering a feature of the Section 8 program currently being administered locally. We think it is a service delivery setback for Section 8 clients, but conceded due to no willingness to move on the issue on the part of the Metropolitan Council. 2. The Metropolitan Council proposed we perform, schedule, attend and present the public housing agency's position at informal hearings requested by Section 8 families whose assistance has been denied, reduced or terminated. Fridley is willing to perform this feature of the contract assuming we are able to secure a hearing officer locally. We requested the local fee for informal hearings be increased from the proposed $100.00 to $175.00. We settled on $150.00. 3. The Metropolitan Council proposed that outside contractors (City) maintain records in their files for 3 years. For reasons of limited space we proposed file retention for 2 years. The Metropolitan Council folks held their position that three years records on a "rolling basis" provide a spectrum of historic documents they feel they need for the program. Ultimately, we agreed to maintain 3 years of records. 4. Previous language placing limitations on the funds that exceed the cost of our service delivery have been removed. In other words, in the past we have been able to keep up to $10,000 of the funds collected for service, funds that go beyond the actual costs of doing the service. We could keep the money under the conditions that it was reinvested in housing programs. Half of our Housing Forum expenses were paid from this account for example. The $10,000 cap has been lifted, which may mean additional funds for housing related programming costs, depending on the number of Section 8 clients served. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the attached contract for Section 8 Contractual Services. � Metropolitan Council Building communities that work - Metro HRA Housing and Redeuelopment Authority May 12, 2005 Scott Hickok, Director of Community Development City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Re: Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program Contract for Administrative Services Dear Mr. Hickok: Enclosed for your consideration �nd egecntion is a Section 8 Housing Assistance Payments Program Contract for Administrative Services. This final version has been derived in response to a review of all comments received along with a continued analysis of our fmancial and business needs. This Contract provides � standard format for all administrative service providers with the exception of those provisions relating to enhanced voucher assistance and project-based assistance. Your contract has been drafted in accordance with information previously provided to us, but can certainly be modified in the future by mutual agreement of both parties. This contract is scheduled to go into effect July 1, 2005. After your review, please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached at 651-602-1600. We would appreciate your obtaining any necessary Contract approval, executing the two enclosed copies of the Contract and forwarding both copies to my attention for final execution. Upon final ezecution, an original copy will be returned for yonr records. We appreciate the work of your staff and look forward to a continued good working relationship. Sincerely, ��'��`��.� �� xat�y ��+� Program Operations Supervisor Metro HRA Enclosure Cc: Pat Wolfe, Metro HRA community representative www.metrocouncff.org Metro Info Line 602-1888 230 East Fifth Street • St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-162 •(651) 602-1428 • Fax 602-1313 • TTY 291-0904 An E4ual OPPort�uithJ ElnPlaJer Reports of all inspections and reinspections shall be made by the Contractor on inspection forms provided or approved by the Council. The Contractor will fully and accurately complete all inspection forms and will provide timely notification of inspection results to landlords and program participants. The Contractor will promptly notify the Council of any required subsidy payment abatements resulting from a landlord's or a family's failure to remedy within specified timelines any "failed" items identified during inspections or reinspections. 2.02 Program Requirements and Training. The Contractor agrees to comply with the following administrative and training requirements during the performance of this Contract. (a) PersonneL The Contractor will designate in writing the person or persons who will conduct or perform the Contractor activities, including inspection and reinspection services, described in this Contract. (b) Training. The Contractor and its designated personnel will develop and maintain a thorough understanding of the Section 8 program regulations and the requirements and procedures set forth in manuals and other materials provided by the Council. The Contractor agrees to send a representative to all required Section 8 program training sessions and sta.ff meetings conducted by the Council. The Council will notify the Contractor of a required training session or required meeting, whenever possible, at least ten (10) business days prior to the training session or meeting. (c) Resources and Sta�ng. The Contractor shall provide adequate staff time and office or program space to perform the Section 8 program administrative services contemplated by this Contract and shall make staff and of6ce or program space available to Section 8 applicants and participants during scheduled business hours approved by Metro HRA staf� Staff and office or program space provided by the Contractor shall comply with a11 applicable state and federal accessibility standards and requirements. The Contractor sha11 provide adequate signs and other directional materials to inform applicants and prospective applicants about the place and manner of making applica.tion. The Contractor shall keep available for distribution adequate brochures and other information or materials as may be prepared by the Council and shall supplement the brochures with local informational materials as appropriate or nceded. The manner of furnishing these services sha11 be agreed upon by the Contractor and the Council. The Contractar and the Council sha11 from time to time confer about the details of the furnishing of these services. The Contractor agrees to comply with reasonable demands made by the Council concerning these program requirements. 2.03 Notice of Actions and Claims. The Contractor will 'unmediately notify Metro HRA sta.ff by telephone about any summons or other legal or judicial notices, including conciliation court suminons or notices, involving claims or disputes related to the administration of the Council's Section 8 program within the Contractor's Service Area. The Contractor will confirm its telephone notification by written notice within three (3) business days after the telephone notification. The Contractor also will notify the Council about and refer to Metro HRA staff within one (1) business day any conta.cts related to the administration of this Contract or the Section 8 families served by the Contractor under this Contract that are received from legal aid representa.tives, legislators or legisladve staff, and television, ra.dio or newspaper media staff. 2.04 Council Program Obligations. Unless otherwise performed by the Contractor under Paragraph 2.01, the Contractor and the Council understand and agree the Contra.ctor shall not be Page S o1f 13 Pages � required to perform the following Section 8 program services and activities which are the primary responsibility of the Council. (a) Areawide Marketing. The Council will coordinate all areawide affirmative marketing activities, such as preparing brochures and advertising, and conta.cting and working with area community groups, rental property owners and rental property management groups. (b) Waiting List Administration. The Council will develop and maintain a Section 8 applicant waiting list and will select applicants for participation in the Section 8 program. (c) Family Self-Sufficiency Progra�n Administration. The Council will administer a11 aspects of Section 8 and Family Self-Sufficiency program administration for Section 8 participants enrolled in the Council's Family Self-Sufficiency program. (d) Records and Overall Program Management The Council will: crea.te, update and maintain computer records of all active and nonactive Section 8 applicants and participants; collect a11 areawide data and prepare all housing assistance program reports for HLJD; provide overall financial program management, including budgeting, requisitions and monitoring; provide necessary equal employment opportunity and affirmative action documents as required by the Consolidated ACC between the Council and HLTD. (e) HAP Contract PaymentS The Council will execute housing assistance payments contracts with rental properiy owners and will authorize and make housing assistance payments to owners, both at month-end and on a weekly basis. ( fl Informal Hearing� If request� by the Contractor, the Council will make available a hearing officer to conduct informal hearings to review denial, reduction or tennination of Section 8 program assistance. (g) Program Training. The Council will provide necessary program training for Contractor staff including, but not limited to, HQS inspection training. The Council will perform HQS inspection monitoring activities. (h) Program Material,� The Council will prepare and provide administrative policies, operating brochures, forms, manuals and other Section 8 program materials. The Council will communi- cate program and policy changes to the Contractor in a timely manner. (i) Application and Lease-up Processe� The Council will coordinate initial application processes and will serve as the clearinghouse for and maintain logs of all incoming and outgoing portability lease-ups. . (j) Enhanced Voucher Assistance and Project-Based Assistance. The Council will administer Section 8 enhanced voucher assistance made available for rental properties located within the Contractor's Service Area, and will administer services specific to Section 8 project-based rental properties located within the Contractor's Service Area. 2.05 Contractor's Service Area. The Council is authorized by Minnesota Statutes section 473.195 to plan and administer a Section 8 program within the seven-county metropolitan area, Page 6 ��3 Pages � including the jurisdiction(s) identified in this Contract. The Section 8 program administrative services contemplated by this Contract shall be provided by the Contractor for Section 8 program applicants and participants residing in or moving into the Contractor's Service Area as defined in Paragraph 1.01(e) of this Contract. III. COMPENSATION AND FEE REIMBURSEMENT 3.01 Ma�eimum Payment and Fees. The Council agrees to pay the Contractor on a monthly basis the reimbursable costs incurral by the Contractor in furrmishing the Section 8 administrative services specified in this Contract which are reimbursable to the Council by HUD. (a) Ongoing Adminis�trative Fee. The Council will pay to the Contractor an ongoing administrative fee on a per-unit-per-month basis. The ongoing administrative fee payable to the Contractor sha11 be fifly percent (5Q%) of the per-unit-per-month administrative fee received by the Council from HUD. The per-unit-per-month flat fee reimbursement amount will be adjusted (increased or decreased) whenever the Section 8 program administrative fees received by the Council from HUD change. Effective upon written notice from the Council, the per-unit-per-month flat fee reimbursement amount will be adjusted (increased or decreased) whenever and by the same factor as the Council's ongoing administrative fee is adjusted (increased or decreased) by HUD. Ongoing administrative fees are subject to porta.bility adjustments under Paragraph 3.01(e). (b) Hard-to House Fee. Provided hard-to-house fees are reimbursed to the Council by HUD, the Council shall pay to the Contractor on a monthly basis 100 percent of any hard-to-house fee the Council receives from HLTD. A fee will be paid to the Contractor for ea.ch hard-to-house family actually housed in a different unit than the family's pre-program dwelling unit, as well as each time a hard-to-house assisted family moves to another dwelling unit with continued Section 8 assistance. A hard-to-house family is a family with three or more minors, or a family with a person who has a disability. A hazd-to-house family is actually housed if both a lease and a housing assistance payments contract are executed. The hard-to-house fee is not payable to the Contractor if a hard-to-house family does not move, or if the hard-to-house family does move but rnoves without continued Section 8 assistance. This hard-to-house fee is in addition to any ongoing administrative fees or any other fees payable under this Paragraph 3.01. (c) Portability Adjustment. In accordance with the portability provisions of the federal laws goveming the Section 8 program, the Council receives from each "Initial PHA" eighty (80) percent of the Initial PHA's ongoing adminisirative fee for each unit month a participant family resides in the Council's Section 8 azea of operation under the federal portability provisions. Accordingly, the Contra.ctor and the Council agree that, for each unit month a Section 8 family receiving Section 8 assistance under the federal portability provisions resides in the Contra.ctor's Service Area, the Contractor will receive from the Council fifi.y percent (50%) of the ongoing administrative fee the Council receives from the Initial PHA. (d) Informal Hearing Fee� In addition to other fees identified in this Paragraph 3.01, the Council will pay to the Contractor a one-time fee for each informal hearing in which the Contractor represents the public housing agency position and explains and provides information to the hearing officer as described in Pazagraph 2.01(b)(11). The one-time fee sha11 be $75.00 if the hearing officer is a Council-provided hearing officer. The one-time fee sha11 be $150.00 if the Contractor provides its own Council-approved hearing officer. Page 7 0�'� Pages � 3.02 Method of Payment Payments to the Contractor by the Council shall be made according to the following provisions: (a) Quarterly Invoices and Reports. The Contractor shall prepare and submit quarterly invoice/ reports on forms or in a format approved by Metro HR.A staff. The invoice/reports shall describe actual administrative services performed during the quarter and itemize the Contractor's reimbursable costs of perfornung those services during the quarter. If the Council does not receive a quarterly invoice/report within thirty (30) days after the end of the quarter, the Council may withhold subsequent monthly fee payments until the invoice/reports for the quarter aze received by the Council. (b) Monthly Payments. Notwithstanding the quarterly invoices and reports, the Council will pay the Contractor the applicable fees under Paragraph 3.01 on a monthly basis. Ongoing adminis- irative fee and hard-to-house fee reimbursement payments to the Contractor will be based on the number of units, as indicated in Metro HR.A's monthly utilization and hard-to-house reports, that are administered by the Contractor witliin the Contractor's Service Area.. One-time preliminary fees for enhanced voucher assistance described in Para.graph 3.01(b) will be paid to the Contractor based on records kept by the Council. The one-time preliminary fees for project- based units and informal hearings deseribed in Paragraphs 3.01(c) and 3.01( fl will be paid to the Contractor based on billings received from the Contractor and verified by the Council. The Contractor will notify the Council of any fee payment or utilization issues. The Council will provide the Contractor a written response to fee payment issues raised by the Contra.ctor. N. RECORDS, FILES, AND AUDITS 4.01 Financial and Accounting Records. The Contractor agrees to maintain accurate, complete and separa.te accounts and records of all expenditures of funds for which reimbursement is claimed under this Contract and of all moneys received pursuant to this Contract. Such accounts and records shall be kept and maintained during the teim of this Contract and for a period of six (6) years following the termination of this Contract. 4.02 Audit and Inspection. The accounts and records maintained pursuant to tlus Contract shall be audited in the same manner as the other accounts and records of the Contractor and may be audited or inspected on the Contractor's premises or otherwise by individuals or organizations designated and authorized by the Council at any time following reasonable notification during the term of this Contract and for a period of six (6) years following the termination of this Contract. The Contractor further agrees that HLTD and the Comptroller General of the United States, or their duly authorized representatives, sha11 have full and free access to all Contractor offices and facilities, and to a11 the books, documents, papers and records of the Contractor that aze pertinent to the performance of this Contract or pertinent to the operation and management of the Section 8 program, including the right to audit, and to make excerpts and transcripts from the books and records. In accordance with Minnesota. Sta.tutes sections 6.551 and 16C.05, subdivision 5, the Contractor sha11 make available to the State Auditor and the Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the Contractor that are relevant to this Contract. 4.03 Records Retention. Except for the financial, accounting and audit information identified in Pazagraphs 4.01 and 4.02 which must be maintained for six (6) years, and unless otherwise required Page 8 0�'�3 Pages . ,a by this Contract or otherwise requested by the Council, the program files and records created and maintained by the Contractor must be maintained by the Contractor for three (3) years on a "rolling" basis, i.e. the Contractor is not required to maintain program files and records after the files and records have been maintained by the Contractor for the required three-year period. However, the Contractor must provide prior written notice to the Council before the Contractor disposes of any program files and records, and must dispose of any program files and records consistent with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. 4.04 Data Privacy. Data on a family that are collected or created because of the family's status as a Section 8 applicant or participant are classified as private "benefit" data under Minnesota Statutes section 13.462. The Contractor agrees to comply with the Minnesota Goveminent Data Practices Act and other applicable state and federal law governing private or confidential data. on individuals. The use or disclosure of information concerning a Section 8 program applicant or participant in violation of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act or any other applica.ble state or federal law or rule of confidentiality is prohibited, except on the written informed consent of the applicant or participant, or as otherwise allowed or provided by state or federallaw. V. CONTRACT TERM 5.01 Period of Performance. This Contract is effective on the date this Contract is finally executed by the Council and shall continue until the earlier of the following: termination of Section 8 program funding by HUD; termination of this Contrac# by either parly pursuant to Paragraph 5.02 of this Contract; or June 30, 2010. R 5.02 Termination of Contrac� The Council and the Contractor both sha11 have the right to � terminate this Contract at any time and for any reason by submitting written notice of texmination to the other party at least ninery (90) days prior to the specified effective da.te of the termination. In addition, the Council shall have the right to terminate this Contract on fourteen (14) calendar days' written notice if the Contractor's performance is not timely or is substantially unsatisfactory, or if the Contractor has violated any of the material terms, conditions or agreements contained in this Contract. In either event, on the teimination of this Contract a11 finished and unfinished documents, work papers, products and records prepared by the Contractor under this Contract sha11 become the properiy of the Council. On the termination of this Contract, the Contractor will be paid for administrative services satisfactorily performed up to the date of the Contract termination according to the terms stated in Article III of this Contract. VI. CONTRACT PERFORMANCE AND MODIFICATION 6.01 Assignment. The Contractor sha11 perform with its own organization the total work provided for under this Contract and shall neither assign this Contract nor subcontract or transfer any of the contract work without the prior written consent of the Council. 6.02 Prompt Payment of Subcontractors. If the Contractor receives prior written consent fram . the Council pursuant to Paragraph 6.01 of this Contract and assigns, subc�ntracts or transfers any of the work provided for under this Contract, the Contractor agrees to pay any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the Contractor's receipt of payment from the Council for undisputed services provided - by the subcontractor(s). The Contractor further agrees to pay interest of one and one-half (llh) percent per month or any part of a month to the subcontractor(s) on any undisputed amount not paid Page 9 o�I3 Pages � . on time to the subcontractor(s). 'The Contractor agrees the minimum monthly interest penalty payrnent for an unpaid balance of one hundred dollars ($100.00) or more is ten dollars ($10.00). For an unpaid balance of less than one hundred dollars ($100.00), the Contractor agrees to pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor(s). 6.03 Amendments. The terms of this Contract may be changed or modified by mutual agreement of the parties. Such amendments, changes or modifications sha11 be effective only on the execution of written amendment(s) signed by the Council and the Contractor. VII. LIABILITY 7.01 Indemnification. To the extent permitted by law, the Contractor agrees to ind�mnify, defend and save and hold the Council, its agents and employees hannless from any and all claims or causes of action arising from the performance of this Contract by the Contractor or the Contractor's employees and agents. This indemiufication provision shall not be construed to bar any legal remedies the Contractor may have for the Council's failure to perform its obligations under this Conixact. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed as a waiver on the part of either the Contractor or the Council of any immunities or limits on liability provided by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466, or other applicable state or federal law. 7.02 Insurance. The Council assumes no liability with respect to bodily injury, illness, accident, theft or any other damages or losses concerning persons or properiy arising out of the use or maintenance of the Contractor's premises, equipment or vehicles: The Contractor is responsible for providing adequate insurance coverage to protect against legal liability arising out of the ` Contractor's activities under this Contract. Upon request from Metro HRA staff, the Contractor shall provide copies of insurance instruments or cerrifications from the insurance issuing agency which show the insurance coverage, the designated beneficiary, the parties covered and the coverage amounts. 7.03 Independent Contractor Status. The Contractor acknowledges that the Contractor and the Contractor's agents and employees are independent contractors u.nder the teims and conditions of this Contract. The Contractor is responsible for the employment, discharge, compensation, benefit coverage and supervision of all Contractor personnel, employees and agents. The Contractor expressly acknowledges that the Contra.ctor and the Contractor's personnel, employees and agents shall not assert any claims against the Couneil for reemployment, workers' compensation or other employee benefits of any type related to the performance of this Contract. VIII. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT; NONDISCRIMINATION 8.01 Equal Employment Opportunity. The Contractor agrees to provide equal employment opportunities. ' (a) Nondiscrimination and Affirmative Action. The Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of ra.ce, color, creed, religion, national origin, _ sex, marital status, status with regazd to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation or age. The Contractor shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants aze employed, and that employees aze trea.ted during employment, without regard to race, color, cre,ed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regazd to public assistance, disability, sexual Page 10 �3 Pages � orientanon and age. Such action includes, but is not limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. (b) Notice Posting. The Contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the nondiscrimination provisions of Paragraph 8.01(a) of this Contract. The Contractor will in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation and age. (c) Subcontracts. The Contractor agrees to incorporate the provisions of Para.graph 8.01 in any subcontracts for project work. 8.02 Equal Opportunity Compliance Reviews. The Contractor shall cooperate with the Council and HUD in conducting compliance reviews and complaint investigations pursuant to applicable federal and state civil rights statutes, executive orders, and related rules and regulations. 8.03 Nondiscrimination in Housing. The Contractor agrees to comply with federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination in housing. (a) Federal Laws. The Contractor sha11 comply with the nondiscrimination requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, or national origin and Executive Order 11063 with respect to those provisions prohibiting discrimination based on religion or sex, and with implementing HLTD regulations. The Contractor sha11 comply with Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental or financing of housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin and with any implementing regulations. The Contractor shall comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilita.tion Act of 1973, as amended, which prohibits discrimination against handica.pped persons who would otheiwise qualify to participate in Section 8 programs and, where applicable, the Age Diserimination Act of 1975, as amended, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of age. Unwed parents, families with children born out of wedlock, and recipients of public assistance shall not be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefit of the Section 8 programs because of such staxus. (b) State and iocal Laws. The Contractor shall comply with all applica.ble provisions of the Minnesota Human Rights Act and applicable local laws. IX. GENERA.L PROVISIONS 9.01 Conflict of Interest The Contractor agrees to abide by federal and state conflict of interest laws pertaining to the performance of this Contract. (a) Federal Conf lict Provisions. (1) In accordance with title 24, Code of Federal Regulations, section .982.161(a), neither the Council nor the Contra.ctor may enter into any contract, subcontract or arrangement in connecdon with the Section 8 tenant-based programs in which any of the following classes of persons has any interest, direct or indirect, during tenure or for one year thereafter: Page 11 0,�3 Pages � (i) Any present or former member or officer of the Council, except a"participant commissioner"; (ii) Any employee of the Council, the Contractor, or any subcontractor or agent of the Council, who formulates policy or who influences decisions with respect to the Section 8 programs; (iii) Any public official, member of a governing body, or state or local legislator, who exercises functions or responsibilities with respect to the Section 8 programs; or (iv) Any member of the Congress of the United Sta.tes. (2) Any member of the classes described in Paragraph 9.01(a)(1) must disclose their interest or prospective interest to the Council and HUD. (3 ) The conflict of interest prohibitions under Paragraph 9.01(a)(1) may be waived by the HUD field office for good ca.use. (b) State Conflict Provisions. The members, officers and employees of the Contractor will comply with a11 applicable state sta.tutory and regulatory confliet of interest laws, including Minnesota Sta.tutes sections 10A.07 and 469.009, as amended. 9.02 Federal Certification Regarding Lobbying. Pursuant to title 24, Code of Federal Regulations, part 87, the Contractor certifies, to the best of its knowledge and belief, that: (a) Use of Federal Funds. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the Contractor, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an of�cer or employee of an agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (b) Disclosure. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a member of Congress in connection with this Contract or its funding, the Contractor shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its inshuctions. (c) Certification. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. This certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by title 31, United States Code, section 1352. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. 17 Page 12 of 13 Pages �` � 9.03 Federal Regulations; I3UD and Metro I3RA Policies. The Contractor agrees to perform the Section 8 program administrative services contemplated under this Contract in compliance with: parts 982, 983 and other applicable provisions of title 24, Code of Federal Regulations, and other applicable provisions of the federal regulations goveming the Section 8 program; applicable provisions of the HUD Handbook; the Administrative Plan for the Metxopolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority, as amended or revised; current procedures, letters and forms provided by the Council in policy/procedural memoranda; HUD's Housing Inspection Manual for the Section 8 Existing Housing Program; and all other applicable procedures and policies as may be provided to the Contractor. 9.04 Prohibition of Service Charges. The Contractor sha11 not charge any fee to any Section 8 program applicant or participant or charge any fee to any rental property owner for any Section 8 program administrative services provided under this Contract. 9.05 Prior Contracts. The Contractor and the Council agree this Contract supersedes and replaces Contract No. C-99-67, and any amendments to Contraci No. C-99-67, and any other prior Section 8 program administrative services contracts entered into between the Council and the Contractor. Contract No. C-99-67 is terminated upon final execution of this Contract. 9.06 Warranty of Legal Capacity. The individual signing this Contract on behalf of the Contractor represents and warrants on the Contractor's behalf that the individual is duly authorized to execute this Contract on the Contractor's behalf, and that this Contract constitutes the Contractor's valid, binding, and enforceable agreements. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Contractor and the Council have cansed tkus Contract to be executed by their duly authorized representatives. Approved as to form: Associate General Counsel HRA051019 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL : Thomas H. Weaver Regional Administrator Date: CITY OF FRIDLEY By: _ Its: Date: By: _ Its: Date: 18 Page 13 of 13 Pages METRO HRA (OS/O5) � � AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING QTY OF FRIDLEY �E 13, 2005 Date: June 8, 2005 ,� j ��r�' To: William Burns, City Manager � From: Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director Subject: CDBG Contract — Gateway West M-05-43 The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program makes Federal money, through HUD, available to Counties for redistribution among cities, townships, and service organizations. The goal of the CDBG program is to develop, according to HUD, "viable communities by providing decent housing, suitable living environments and expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low to moderate income." Acquisition and removal of blighted properties is a high priority, both nationally and in Anoka County. Based on this information staff prepared an application seeking an addiiionai $167,600 to cover the purchase price, relocation expenses, and demolition costs for the remainder of the Gateway West project. On April 26th, the Anoka County Board approved an award of $164,876 for the City to continue its efforts in completing the Gateway West project. These funds will be made available after July 1, 2005 and will be used to cover the demolition and removal of the blighted properties in the project area. The contract required by HUD and Anoka County has been attached to this memo for signatures from the Mayor and City Manager. ]:�Planning�Council Items By Meeting�200S Council Items\june 13, 2005\CDBG ContractMemo.doc 19 2005-0087 ANOKA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM AGREEMENT between THE COUNTY OF ANOKA, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, BY AND THROUGH THE ANOKA COUNTY HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, A PUBLIC BODY CORPORATE AND POLITIC AND CITY OF FRIDLEY This Agreement is entered into this 15� day of July, 2005, between the County of Anoka, a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, by and through the Anoka County Housing and Redevelopment Authority, a public body corporate and politic (hereinafter refeRed to as the "HRA"), and City of Fridley (hereinafter referred to as the "Agency"): RECITALS A. The County of Anoka (hereinafter "County") is an urban county applicant for block granf funds under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (the Act), Pub. L. 93-383 as amended, and will receive block grant funds for the purpose of carrying out eligible community development and housing activities under the Act and under regulafions promulgated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) at 24 CFR p. 570; B. An Urban County Consortium has been established by a Joint Cooperation Agreement between the County and municipal corporations within the County, the terms of which specify allocation of block grant funds to those participating jurisdictions for use in accordance with the County Housing Assistance and Community Development Plans accepted by participating jurisdictions and reviewed by HUD; C. The County has entered into a joint powers agreement with the HRA to administer the Communit�r Development Block Grant Program and delegated to the HRA the rights, duties and obligations to disperse, monitor and administer funds under the Community Development Block Grant program, in a manner consistent with terms and conditions imposed on the County by agreement, County resolution, HUD regutations, and the Community Development Block Grant Plan; D. The HRA desires to have certain services perFormed by the Agency as described within this agreement, and as authorized by County resolutions for the purpose of implementing eligible actn►ities under the Act and HUD regulations, E. It is appropriate and mutually desirable that the Agency be designated by the HRA to undertake the aforementioned eligible activities, so long as the requirements of the Act, HUD Regulations, state law and local law are adhered to, as provided for herein; The purpose of this Agreement is to provide for cooperation between the HRA and the Agency, as the parties in this agreement, in implementing such eligible activities in the manner described above; G. The parties are authorized and empowered to enter int� this Agreement by the Laws of the State of Minnesota. 2� H � The attached exhibits as listed below are hereby incorporated in this agreement and made a part hereof: PART I. GENERAL CONDITIONS PART il. FEDERAL AND LOCAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS PART ili. EVALUATION AND RECORD KEEPING Exhibit A HUD Project Activity Sheet Exhibit B Objectives of CDBG Funds Exhibit C Anoka County Board Resol�tion No. 85-23 Exhibit D Anoka County Board Resolution No. 85-42 Exhibit E Anoka County Board Resolution No. 86-70 Exhibit F Cefification Exhibit G Equal Employment Opportunity Certification In consideration of payments, covenants, and agreements hereinafter mentioned, to be made and performed by the parties hereto, the parties mutually covenant and agree as provided for in this agreement. COUNTY: AGENCY: By: Steve Novak, Division Manager Govemmental Seroices Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM: sy: Assistant County Attomey Date: By: (signadue) Name: (P�� Ti�e: Date: By: cs��> Name: (P�U Title: Date: Hereinafter, references to the "County" shall be deemed to be references to the Anoka County Housing and Redevelopment Authority. �1 B. The Agency shail be responsibie for all such property, including its care and maintenance. C. The Agency shall admit the County's property management officer to the Agency's premises for the purpose of marking such property, as appropriate, with county property tags. D. The Agency shall meet the following procedural requirements for all such property: (1} Property records shall be maintained accurately and provide for: a description of the property; manufacturer's serial number or other identification number; acquisition date and cost; source of the property; percentage of block grant funds used in the purchase of property; and location, use, and condition of the properiy. (2) A physical inventory of property shall be taken and the results reconciled with the property records at least once every two (2} years to verify the existence, current utilization, and continued need for the property. (3) A control system shall be in effect to insure adequate safeguards to prevent loss, damage, or theft to the property. Any loss, damage, or theft of the property shall be investigated and fully documented. � (4) Adequate maintenance procedures shall be imple�nted to keep the property in good condition. AGQUISITION AND RELOCATION A. Any acquisition of real property for any activity assisted under this Agreement shall comply with Ti�e III of the Federal Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (hereinafter referred to as the Uniform Act) (42 USC section 4601) and the Regulations at 24 CFR pt. 42. B. Any displacement of persons, businesses, nonprofit organizations or fanr►s as the result of acquisition of real property assisted under this Agreement shall comply with Title II ofthe Uniform Act as amended by the Uniform Relocation Act as amended Title lV of the Su�face T�ansportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act as amended (Pub. L 100•17,101 Stat. 246-256) and the Regulations at49 CFR pt. 24. The Agency shall comply with the Regulations pertaining to costs of reloca6on and written policies, as specified by 24 CFR section 570.606 (a) &(b). C. In any activity assisted under this agreement which results in demolition or conve�sion to another use of low/moderate income housing, the agency will follow the requirements set forth in the revised sect9on 104(d) of the Housing and Communifij Development Act of 1974, as .amended, and implementing r�gulations. 8. WISTORIC PRESERVATION The Agency shall meet the historic preservation requirements of Public Law 89-665 and the Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-291) and Execu6ve Order 11593, including the procedures prescribed by the Advisory Council on Historic PreseNation in the Regulations at 36 CFR pt 800. Activities afEect9ng property listed in or found to be eligible for inclusion in the Na#ional Register of Historic Places wiff be subject to requirements set fo�th in HUD Environmental Review Procedures at 24 CFR pt. 58. 9. ARCHITECTURAL BARRIERS Any faciliiy constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall comply with design requirements of the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (42 USC section 4151 et. seq. & 24 CFR 40, et seq.). 10. NONPARTiC1PATI0N iN POLITICAL ACi'IVfTIES � The Agency shall comply with the provisions of the Hatch Act (5 USC Chapter 15). � 11. CONDITIONS FOR RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS The Agency agrees that funds provided under this contract will not be utilized for religious activities, to promote religious interests, or for the benefit of a religious organization in accordance with the Federal regulations specified in 24 CFR 570.200(j). 12. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE The Agency may not receive Community Development Block Grant funding for acquisition ar construction for use in any area that has been identified as having special flood hazards and is not participa6ng in the Na6onal Flood Insurance Program, as provided by Section 3(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (Pub. L.93- 234) and the Regulations thereunder (24 CFR Ch. 58.6, sub chap. B). The Agency shall c�mply with the Regulations at 24 CFR section 570.605. 13. AIR AND WATER POLLUTION The Agency shall comply with the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 USC section 1857 et se . and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33 USC sections 1251 et se . and the regulations issued thereunder (40 CFR pt.15). 14. LEAD-BASED PAINT POISONING The Agency shall comply with the HUD Lead-Based Paint Regulations (24 CFR pt. 35) issued pursuant to the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 USC sections 4831 et se . requiring (1) prohibition of the use of lead-based paint (whenever funds under this Agreement are used direcby or indirectly for construction, rehabilitation, or modemization of residential structures); (2) elimina6on of immediate lead-based paint hazards in residential s�vctures; and (3) notifica6on of the hazards of lead-based paint poisoning to purchasers and tenants of residential structures constructed prior to 1978. All work performed on lead-containing surfaces must conform to lead-safe practices and be completed by workers who are either supervised by an EPA-certified abatement supervisor or be performed by workers trained in lead-safe work practices. If abatement options are specified in the work write-up, the contractor must hire an EPA-certified and state-licensed abatement contractor and submit proof of their current state license and insurances. 15. NON-DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DISABILITY When and where applicable, the agency shall comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794) and Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act as amended, Public Law 101- 336 (1990�, to ensure that no otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States shall, solely by reason of his or her handicap, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefi#s of, or be subjected to discrimination under any prog�am or activity �eceiving financial assistance under this agreement. - 16. NON-SUBSTITUTION FOR LOCAL FUNDING The Block Grant Funding made available under this Agreement shall not be utilized by the Agency to reduce substantially the amount of local financial suppo�t for community development activities below the level of such support prior to the availability of funds under this Agreement. 17. PUBLIC OWNERSHIP For Agencies which are not municipal corporations organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, it may become necessary to grant the County a prope�ly interest where the subject project calls for the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of publicly-owned facilities and improvements. The Agency shall comply with current County policy regarding transfer of a property interest sufficient to meet the public ownership requirement. �'�'•� 18. PUBLIC INFORMATION A. In all news releases and other public notices related to projects funded under this Agreement, the Agency shall include information identifying the source of funds as the Anoka County Community. Development Block Grant Program. B. For all construction projects the Agency shall erect a sign to County specifications at the constn�ction site, identifying the source of funds, except that this requirement may be waived for construction projects of Ten Thousand and no1100 ($10,000.00) Dollars or less. 19. APPLICABLE UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS A. An Agency (recipients and subrecipients) that is a govemmental entity (including public agencies) shall comply with the requirements and standards of OMB Circular No. A-87, "Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Govemments"; OMB CircularA-128,'Audits of State and Local Govemments (implemented at 24 CFR part 44); and with the following sections of 24 CFR Pa�t 85 "Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Govemments' or the related CDBG provision, as specified in this paragraph: (1) Section 85.3, "Definitions"; (2) Section 85.6, "Additions and Exceptions"; (3) Section 85.12, "Special grant or subgrant conditions for'high-risk' grantees"; (4) Section 85.20, "Standards for financial management systems," except paragraph (a); (5) Section 85.21, "Payment," except as modified by § 570.513; (6) Section 85.22, "Allowable costs"; (7) Section 85.26, "Non-federal audits"; (8) Section 85.32, "Equipment,' except in all cases in which the equipment is sold, the proceeds shall be program income; (9) Section 85.33, "Supplies"; (10) Section 85.34, "Copyrights"; (11) Section 85.35, "Subawards to debarred and suspended parties"; (12) Section 85.36, "Procurement," except paragraph (a); (13) Section 85.37, "Subgrants"; (14) Section 85.40, "Monitoring and reporting program performance," except paragraphs (b) through (d) and paragraph (fl; (15) Section 85.41,'Financial reporting," except paragraphs (a), (b), and (e); (16) Section 85.42, "Retention and access requirements for records," except that the period shall be four years; (17) Section 85.43, "Enfo�cement"; (18) Section 85.44, "Termination for convenience"; � (19) Section 85.51, "Later disallowances and adjustments" and (20) Section 85.52, "Collection of amounts due." B. An Agency (subrecipient), except agencies that are govemmental entities, shall comply with the �quirements and standards of OMB Circular No. A-122, "Cost Principles for Non-profit Organizations" or OMB Ci�cular No. A-21, "Cost Principles for Educational Institu6ons," as applicable, and OMB Ci�cular A-133, "Audits of Institutions of Higher Education and Other Non-profit Institutions (as set forth in 24 CFR part 45). Audits shall be conducted annually. Such subrecipients shall also comply with the following provisions of Uniform Administrative requirements of OMB Circular No. A-110 (implemented at 24 CFR part 84, `Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other Non-profit Organizations") or the related CDBG provision as specified in this paragraph: (1) Subpart A — "General"; (2) Subpart B—°Pre-Award Requirements," except for § 84.12, 'Forms for Applying for Federal Assistance"; (3) Subpart C—"Post-Award Requirements," except for. - � �0 (i) Section 84.22, "Payment Requirements." Grantees shall follow the standards of §§ 85.20 (b) (7) and 85.29 in making payments to subrecipients; (ii) Section 84.23, "Cost Sharing and Matching"; (iii) Section 84.24, "Program Income." In lieu of § 84.24, CDBG subrecipients shall follow § 570.504; (iv) Section 84.25, "Revision of Budget and Program Plans"; (v) Section 84.32, "Real Property.° In lieu of § 84.32, CDBG subrecipients shall follow § 570.505; (vi) Section 84.34(g), "Equipment" In lieu of the disposition provisions of § 84.34(g), the following applies: (A) In all cases in which equipment is sold, the proceeds shall be program income (prorated to reflect the extent to which CDBG funds were used to acquire the equipment); and (B) Equipment not needed by the subrecipient for CDBG activities shall be transferred to the recipient for the CDBG program or shall be retained after c�mpensating the recipient; (vii) Section 84.51(b), (c), (d), (e), (fl, (g), and (h), °Monitoring and Reporting Program PerFormance"; (viii) Section 84.52, °Financial Reporting"; (ix) Section 84.53(b), "Retention and access requirements for records " Section 84.53(b) applies with the following exceptions: (A) See the retention period referenced in § 84.53(b) pertaining to individual CDBG activities; and (B) The retention period sta�ts from the date of submission of the annual performance and evaluation report, as prescribed in 24 CFR 91.520, in which the specific activity is reported on for the final time rather than from the date of submission of the final expenditure report for the award; (x) Section 84.61, "Terminafion." In lieu of the provisions of §84.61, CDBG subrecipients shall comply with § 570.503(b)(7); and (4) Subpart D—"After-the-Award Requirements," except for §84.71, °Close-out Procedures.' PART III. EVALUATION AND RECORD KEEPING EVALUATION The Agency agrees to participate with the County in any evaluation project or performance report, as designed by the County or the appropriate Federal agency, and to make available all information required by any such evaluation process. Accomplishment data verifjring the project's benefit to its designated ta�get population must be� gathered and maintained by the Agency. Projects unable to document the accomplishment of designated benefits and goals will be required to submit a written explanation for why those goals/benefits were not met. If the project fails to meet the designated National Objective or Benefit, the Agency may be required to reimburse allocated funds to HUD. 2. AUDITS AND INSPECTIONS The Agency shall obtain an independent audit for any calendar year during which the agency expended at least $500,000 of Federal funds. Qualified individuals who are sufficiently independent of those who authorize the expenditure of Federal funds shall make such audit. The audit report shall state that the audit was performed in accordance with the generally accepted govemmental audit standards for financial and compliance audits of the U. S. General Accounting Office Standards for Audit of Govemmental Omanizations Proqrams, Activities, and Functions, and the provisions of OMB A-110. When applicable, the /�gency shall also comply with the audit requirements of revised OMB Circular A-133 dated June 24,1997. -�a�1 The records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this contract shall be subject at all times to inspection, review or audit by the County, Federal or State officiais so authorized by law during the performance of this contract and during the period of retention specified in this Part III. 3. RECORDS As required by HUD Regulations, 24 CFR pt. 570, the Agency shall compile and maintain the following records: A. Financial ManaQement - such records shall identify adequately the sou�ce and application of funds for activities within this Agreement, in accordance with the provisions of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-102 or A-110 as appropriate. These records shall contain information pe�taining to grant awards and authorizations, obligations, un-obligated balances, assets, liabilities, outlays, and income. B. Citizen Participation - Narrative and other documentation describing the process used to inform citizens conceming the amount of funds available, the ranges of project activities undertaken, and opportunities to participate in funded block grant projects. C. Relocation - Indication of the overall status of the relocation workload and a separate relocation rec;ord for each pe�son, business, organization, and farm operation displaced or in the relocation workload. D. Propefi+AcQUisition - Agency files must contain (a) invitation to owner to accompany appraiser during inspection, (b) at least one property appraisal, (c) statement of basis for determination of just compensation, (d) written offer of just compensation, (e} all documents involving conveyance, (fl settlement cost reporting statement, and (g) notice to surrender possession of premises. E. Eaual OpportunitY - The Agency shall maintain racial, ethnic, and gender data showing the extent to which these categories of persons have participated in, or benefited from, the activities carried out under this Agreement. The Agency shall also maintain data which records its affirmative action in equal opportunity employment, and its good-faith efforts to identify, train, and/or hire lower- inc�me residents of the project area and to utilize business concerns which are located in or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the area of the project. F. Labo� Standards - Records shall be maintained regarding compliance of all cantractors perfonning construction work under this Agreement with the labor standa�ds made applicable by 24 CFR 570,603. G. Determinations of Condition of Slum and Bliqht - The agency will submit: (1) An attorney's opinion that an area designated as slum or blighted for the purpose of qualifying a CDBG-activity meets the State or local definition of same; (2) The boundary of the area so designated; (3) A list of the conditions the CDBG-funded activity is intended to address. In the event that a single properry is designated as blighted, the community must submit a certified building inspector's report on the cronditions leading to that determination. H. Economic Development - The agency will maintain copies of financial statements that indicate the historical and projected income of a company approved for CDBG assistance. Those records will include three years of profit and loss statements, balance statements and projected income statements. The agency will also keep records indicating the amount and terms of assistance provided together with an explanation of how the assistance provided meets the "necessary and appropriate" requirements communicated in the June 2,1987 Stokvis memorandum. Such other records as may be required by the County and/or HUD. 3� RETENTION OF RECORDS Records documenting this 2005-funded project shall be retained by the Agency through June 30, 2011, except as follows: (1) Records that are the subject of audit findings shall be retained for five (5) years after such findings have been resolved. (2) Records for nonexpendable property shall be retained for five (5) years after its final disposition. Nonexpendable property is defined in the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-102 or A-110 as appropriate. 5. REPORTS The Agency shall submit such repo�ts as required by the County on a monthly and annual basis and also prior to project execution. - t�3 Exhibit A - CPMP Version 1.2 Grantee Name: Anoka County ' Project Name: Cit of Fridle - Gatewest West Reevelo ment Pro'ect Description: IDIS Project #: UoG Codes MN279003 ANOKA COUNIY CDBG funds will be used for the acquisition of the final home needed to move forward with the Gateway West ProjecC. The final project will consist of 14 newly constructed single family homes. Location: - _� ., . . ,..... ;. , � 57th and University Avenue NE, Fridley, MN 55432 Select one' �er Occupied Housing � Explanation: Expected Completion Date: This project meets a high priority in the AC Con Plan. The 12/31/2006 boundaries for the LMA are Block Group 512012 at 62.5% LM National Objective Codes: LMA � . , �'.�:.� . _ . E � �� .._.�� _ ❑ Help tt►e Homeless 1 Improve the quality of owner housing � ❑ Help Persons with HN/AIDS 2 Increase the availability of affordable owner housing � ❑ Help Persons with Disabilities ❑ Address Public Housing Needs 3 � 10 Housing Units � Proposed 1 Aaompi. Type: � Proposed — = Underway Undenroay ` � d Complete Complete � y Accompl. Type: � Proposed Accompl. Type: � Pro osed � �— Underway Underway o� Complete Complete '' � � Proposed Aaom T � P�oposed a � Aocompi. Type: P�• YPe� v Underway Underway Q Complete Complete Pro osed Outcome Pefformance Measure . Actual Outcome 01 Acquisition of Real Property 570.201(a) � Matrix Codes � Matrix Codes � Matrix Codes � Matrix Codes � Matrix Codes � � CDBG � Proposed Amt. 164,876 Fund Source: � Proposed Amt. L Actual Amount Actual Amount } Fund Source: � Proposed Amt. Fund Source: � Proposed Amt. Actual Amount _. Actual Amount � Aaompl. Type: � Proposed Units . Accompl. Type: � Proposed Units . Gf Actual Units Actual Units L Aaompl. Type: � Proposed Units Aaompl. Type: � Proposed Units - a Actual Units Actual Units CDBG - City of Fri�l�y: Gateway West Exhibit B Urban Anoka County CDBG 2005 Statement of Community Development Objectives of Funds Pursuant to Community Development Block Grant regulation, Anoka County has made available to the pubiic the foliowing statement of final use of 2005 — 2009 Anoka County CDBG funds. Citizens, non-project groups, and other interested persons are invited to comment upon this statement and upon Anoka County's perFormance of the CDBG program by contacting Anoka County Community Development, Government Center, 7�' F{oor, 2100 Third Avenue, Anoka, Minnesota 55303, telephone number 763-323-5709, Attention: Karen Skepper. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES FOR 2005 - 2009 ANOKA COUNTY CDBG PROGRAM The foliowing objectives have been established for assisting communities and citizen groups in the formulation of specific program activities: 9. Provide Decent Housing • Assist homeless persons obtain affordable housing � Assist persons at risk of becoming Momeless • Retention of affordable housing stock � Make available permanent housing that is affordable to low-income residents without discrimination • Increase the supply of supportive housing for persons with special needs • Provide affordable housing that is accessible to job opportunities 2. Provide a Suitable Living Environment • Improve the safety and livability of neighborhoods • Increase access to quality facilities and services • Reduce the isolation of income groups within an area through decentralization of housing opportunities and revitalization of deteriorating neighborhoods • Restore and preserve properties of special historic, architectural, or aesthetic value • Conservation of energy resources 3. Expand Economic Opportunities • Job creation and retention � • Establish, stabilize and expand small businesses • Provision of public services concerned with employment • Provision of jobs to low-income persons living in areas affected by those programs, or resulting from activities under programs covered by the plan • Available mortgage financing for low-income persons at reasonable rates • Access to capital and credit for development activities that promote long-term economic and social viability of the community • Empower low-income persons to reduce generational poverty in federally assisted housing and public housing The above objectives were developed in cooperation with the communities in Anoka County and are based on need as illustrated by statistics drawn from 2000 Census data. Overall, they are a continuation of past CDBG programs, and many communities sustaining efforts begun in those years. 35 Ezhibit C BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Anoka County, Minnesota DATE Febr�ary 21 1985 RESOLUTION N0. 85-23 OFFERED BY COMMISSIONER Langfeld TIAAELY EXPENDITl1RE OF C.D.B.G. FUrlDS WF-�REAS, Anoko Covnty is an Entitlement Covnty and therefore receives onnual Comm�nity Development Block Grant (CDBG) allocations from the U.S. Depatment of Hovsing and Urbon Development; and, WI$REAS, the Anoka Ca�nty Board of Commissioners makes these CDBG fynds cvailable to municipalities in Anoka Covnty for eligble projects; and, VYF$REAS, Anoka Covnty� cs the grcntee, is respo�ible for the timely ezpenditure of CDBG f�nds; and, WHEREAS, Anoka Co�nty's performance is measured in p�t by s�ch timefy performar�ce; ond, � WI-�REAS, Mdco County may be svbject to HUD fiscal wnctioru for faiture to expend CDBG funds within a reasonable period of time: NOW, . THEREFORE� BE IT RESOLVED that the .Andca County Bo�d of Commissioners adopts the following Policy Regarding Schedvle for Expenditure of Community Development Blxk Grant Funds by Andca County Subgrantees: POLICY REGAFtDING SCt�DtAE FOR EXPENDITURE OF COMMt�.117Y DEVELOPMEN7 BLOCK GRANT Fl�IDS . � BY ANOKA COUNTY SUBGRANTEES Commvnity Deve{oprtient Btxk Grcnt Funds will be reserved for eligble twdgeted wbgroniee octivities for up to I8 months ofter notice of ovoilability of svch f�nds for expenditvra If p community foils to rxpend CDBG project fvnds within that time timit, the Andcc Co�nty Bo�d of Commissioners will withdraw the allxation for that project. !n order that communities may hove udequate notice of the impendinq withdrawel, Covnty CDBG staff will notify those cominunities which hove not commifted CDBG project funds within 12 monihs atter the stort of the applicable CD6G program year of that condition. Such noTice will enable those communities to re-evuluote projecis and to program the fvnds if necessary. Those comm�nities which are in violotion of the 18 month rule at the time of adoption of this poliry will be given six months from the daYe of the Co�nty Boord Resolution referencing this policy, to expend their CDBG project funds. A' the end of the six month period, !he funds wil) be s�bject to withdrowoL TFie Andca County Board may on an individual case basis, elect to waive the 18 month rule if the Board should determine that tfie project delay is coused by forces outside the control of the community and that project completion is feosible within a reosonabte omount of time. • F�nds which revert to Anoka County sholl be reallaeated at the discrefion of the Co�nty Board to either other projects submitted by communities or to County-wide activities. Ariy communify based groups or other subgrantees of communities musi be notified of this policy when they are considered for CDBG funding. � RESOLl1TION �85-23 (Continve� District li I - Haas District 02 - Burman District �3 - Langfeld District 04 - Kordiak District #S - Cenaiko District #6 - McCarron District �7 - Erhqrt YES X X X X X X X Haas Burman Longfeld Kordiak Cenaiko McCarron Erh�t �:�] State of Minnesota � SS County of Anoka ) � 1, John "Jay" McLinden, Co�nTy Administrotor, Andca Covnty, Minnesota, hereby certify that I hwe comp�ed the foregoing copy of the resol�tion of the Co�nty Board of said Covnty with the original record thereof on file in the Administration Office, Anoka Covnty, Minnesota, as stated in the minufes of the proceedings of soid Board at c meeting dvly held on Febrvary 21, 1985; and Yhat the some is a frue and correct copy of said original reeord and of the whole thereof, ond that said resolUtion was d�ly passed by said Boa�d at said meeting. Wifiess my hand and seal this 21st day of February, 1965. � . . "J " p cLIN OUNT ADMI►VISTRATOR 37 Ezhibit D BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Anoka County, Minnesota DATE April 23, 1985 RESOLUTION NO. 85-42 OFFERED BY COMMISSIONER LO"9feld COUNTY BOARD POLICY - COMMUNtTY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GR�4NT PROGRAM {NCOME AMEI�ING RESOLUTIONS 81-107 AND 82-53 WHEREAS, Title i of the Housing end Canrnunity Development Act of 1974 as amended provides for a program of Community Development Block Grants, and, . WHEREAS, the Anoka County Board of Commissioners hos been designcTed as an "Urban County" by the Federal Housing and Urbari Development Department and consequentiy is eligible to p�ticipate in the Nctionol Community Development Block. Grant Program; ond, Wt-�REAS, the Anoka County Board of Commissioners hos directed the prepuraYion of a plan under the Community Development Block Grant Progrom in concert with the municipalities of Anoka County; and, WHEREAS, as a portion of soid plun, mw�icipolities as the sub-grantee of Community Development Block Gront funds may utilize wid funds in variovs program forms to benefit low and moderate income persons, to aid in the prevention or� elimination of slums or blight or to meet oiher comrnunity development needs hwing a particular urgency beccuse of threat to health and safety; and, � WHEREAS; "progrom income" mearu grass income earned by the sub-gmntee from the grani svpported activity such as: proceeds from the sale of real or personal p�operty, interest e�ned on escrow accounts, revolving rehabilitation oc�unts or Ivmp sum rehabilitotion �covnts, income from service fees, sale of commodities, usage or rental fees, lo� proceeds from rehabititation o� econ«nic development loans, and interest earned on revolving loans ond proceeds from specia! assessments levied to recover the cost of corutructing a publie�worlcs or facility to the extent that svch cost was initially pnid with the Community Development Block Gront f�mds; and, W!-lEREAS, in occord�ce with Federal rcgvlotioru, Anoka Co�nty as the Comm�nity Development Block Grant recipient musT receive all program income. The County the� may use said fvnds for ony eligible Comm�nity Development Block Grant octivity and the County must expend reven�es generated by program i�come before f�rther drawdown requests will be authorized; and, WHEREAS, payments of interest and principal due on economic.developmcnt loans to private indvstry, which are mede to o revolving loan account which was approved as a C.D.G.B. gront to a Stote-cerTified local development corporatian are not considered by HUD to be "program income": ' NOW, TNEREFORE, BE fT RESO�VED rhat the Anoka County Board of Commissioners does hereby establish as a matter of policy that: I) All income from CDBG-f�nded activities which meets the obove definition of progrom income, sholl be promptly forwarded to Anoka Co�nty. 2) Each L�C which has a CDBG revolving loan acco�nt for economic development will retain loan repayments within the occount for continved use for economic development ond ihat the County or the city will execute an agreemenT with the LDC which will i�lude: a) Prohibition of conflict of interest as provided in HU� Regulation 24CFR Port 570.61 I. . b) Compliance with Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. c) Requirement for the LDC to submit quarterly reports to the Anoka County- Community Development Director regarding the use and resvlts of expenditure of funds from the revolving loon account for so long as Anoka CouMy remoins an entitlement co�nty. d) Any other provisioru required by State or Federal taw or reguiation. 0 RESOLUTION �85-42 (Contin�ed) Page 2 3} � Anoka Covnty will establish as of May I, 19B5, a revolving loan ocrnvnt for deposit of all economic development loan payments received by Anoko Covnty. BE lT FURTHER RESOLVED tfiat, oll progrom income received by Anoka Co�nty from activities funded in total or port from a municipality's CDBG project. will increase that community's budget for eligible CDBG octivities and shal) fherefore be ovcilable to the comm�nity for fuTwe expenditure pu�suant to the Joint Cooperation Agreement in effect at the time of exper�diture. District #1 - Hoas � District �f2 - Bvrman District �i3 - Lungfeld District �4 - Kofdiak Distriet �S - Cenoiko District �f6 - McCarron District A�7 - Erhart State of Mi�nesota � 5S County of Anoka ) � �S X � X X X ' X - X X �'�OQS Bu�mnn Langfeld Kordiak Cenciko McCarron Erh�t � l, John "Jay" McLi�den, County Administrator, Anoka Crnmty, Minnesota, hereby certi�fy thot I have compared the foregoing copy of the resolution of the Covnty Board of said County with the original record thereof on fi(e in the Administration Office, Anoka County, Minnesota, as stdted in the minutes of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting duly held on April 23, 1985, and that the sa'ne is a tr�e and correct copy of said original record and of the whole thcreof, and that said resolution wos duly passed by said Board at said meeting. Witnes� my hand ond seal this 23rd day of April, 1985. ! " " c N N COUNT AD INISTRATOR � F�hibit E BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Anoka County. Minnesota Aug�st 12, t986 86-70 DATE RESOLUTION N0. Hoos S f ef fen OFFERED BY COMMISSIONER COUNTY BOARD POLICY - COMMUNITY DEVEl.OPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM INCOME AMENDING RESOLUTION 85-42 WHEREAS, Title 1 of the Ho�sing and Comm�nity Development Act of 1974 ns omended provides For a program of Community Development Block Gront� and, WHEREAS, the Anoka County Board of Commissioners has been designated as an "Urban County" by the Federnl Housing and Urbon Development Department aixf coruequently is eligible to porSicipate in the National Commvnity Develop�xnt Block Grant Program; and, WHEREAS, the Anokc County Boord of Commissioners has directed the preparation of a plan under the Commvnity Development Block Gront Program in concert with the municipalities of Anoka Co�nty; cnd, WHEREAS, as o portion of said plan, munlcipalities as the sub-grantee of Commvnity Development Blxk Grant funds may utifize soid funds in various p�ogrnm forms to benefit low and moderafe income persons, to aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight or to meeT other commvnity development needs having a porticulor urgency becavse of threat to health �d safety; and, WHEREAS, "progr6m income" meons income earned by the svb-grantee from the grant s�pported octivity such ns: proceeds from the sote of real or personal pr�erty, interest earned on escrow acco�nts, revolving rehabilitation acco�nts or I�mp sum rehabilitotion occounts, income from service fees, sale of commodities, vsage or rental fees, loon proceeds fran rehabilitotion or economic development loans, and interest earned on revolving loans and proceeds from special assessmen�s levied to recover the cost of constrvcting a public works or focility to the extent that wch cost was initiolly paid with the Commvnity Development Block Grant funds; end, WHEREAS, in accordance with Federal rogvlations, Anokc Covnty as the Community Development Block Gront recipient mvst receive all progrom income, to be vsed for ony eligible Comm�nity �evelopment Blxk Grant octivity cnd the County , mvst expend reven�es generated by program income before further drawdown requests will be authorize� � • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thut the Anoka Co�nty Board of Commissioners does hereby establish as a motter of poficy that: - I) All CDBG program income meeting the above definition, exeept pdyments to a Covnty-approved LDC revolving loan account, shall be promptly forwurded to Anoka Co�nty. • 2) Each LDC which has a CDBG revolving loan occount for economic development will refain toan repayments within the acco�nt for continued use for economic development svbject to all CDBG regvlations, and that the County or ihe city will exec�te an ogreement with the LDC which wil I incl�dr. • �5� b) c) d) Prohibitio� of conflict of .interest as provided in HVD Regvlation 24CFR Part 570.61 I. Compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Requirement for ihe LDC to submit quarferly reporfs to fhe Anoka Camty Community Develop[n�nt Director regarding the �se �d results of expendit�re of f�nds from the revolvi�g loan Qcco�nt for so long ac Anoka County remains an enTitlement counTy. Any other provisions required by State o� Federal !cw or regulation. 3) Anoko County hos established as of Moy I, 1985, a revolving loan account for deposit of all economic developmeni loan payments received by Anoka Cotmty. BE IT FURTt-1ER RESOLVED that, alI program income receivedby Anoka County from activities fvnded in total or port from o municipality's COBG project will increase that community's budget for eligible CDBG activities and shafl therefore be woilable to the community for f�t�re expenditure pursuant to the'Joint Cooperation Agreernent in effiect at the time of expenditvre. 0 RESOLUTION 686-70 Page 2 District // I - Haas Steffen District /!2 - B�rma� District 03 - Langfeld District �{4 - Kordiak District !/5 - Cenoiko District !f6 - McCarron �istrict �7 - Erhart State of Minnesota � SS Camty of Anoka ) �� X X Absent X X X X Hoas Stef fen Burman Langfeld Kordiak Cenqiko McCorron Erhart � � 1, John ".1oy" McLinden, Covnty Administrator, Anoka County, Minnesoto, hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of the resolvtion of the Covnty Board of said Covnty with the original record thereof on file in the Administration Office, Anoka Co�nty, Minnesota, as stated in the min�tes of ihe proceedings of wid Boord ot a meeting duly held on Aug�st 12, f 986, and that the same is a trve o� correct copy of said original record and of ihe whole thereof, and that said resolution w¢s duly possed by said Board at said meeting. Witness my hand ond seal this 12th day of August, 1966. • C 0 ( HN "J " LINOE . COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 41 Exhibit F CERTIFICATION The Undersigned, on behalf of the Agency, certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: (1) No federally appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any pe�son for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awa�ding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative agreement. (2) If any funds other than federally appropriated funds have been paid or wilt be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,° in accordance with instructions. (3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for atl subawards at all tiees (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1332, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less that $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. AGENCY: By: _ Its: _ Date: By: , Its: Date: 42 Equal Employment Opportunity Certification Excerpt Frorn 41 CFR §60-1.4(b) Exhitit G U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Housing Federal Housing Commissioner Department of Veterans Affairs The applicant hereby aD ees that it will incorporate or cause to be incorporated into any contract for construction work, or modifi- cation thereof, as defined in the regularions of the Secretary of Labor at 41 CFR Chapter 60, which is paid for in whole or in part with funds obtained from the Federal Government or borrowed oa the credit of the Federal Government pursuant to a grant, contract, loan inswance. or guarantee, or undertaken pursuant to any Federal program involving such grant, contract, loan, insur- ance, or guarantee, the following equal opportunity clause: Dur4ng the performance of this contrac[, the contractor agrees as follows: (1) The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for cmployment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicanu are employed, and that em- ployees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: Employ- ment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer, recruitment or re- cruitment advertising; layoff or termination; races of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants f�r employment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. (2) The coauactor will, in all solicitations or advertisemen[s for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicanu will receiv� considerations for em- ployment without regard to race, color, rcligion, sex, or national origin. � (3) The contractor will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining agrce- ment or othcr contract or understanding, a notice to be pmvided advising the said labor union or workers' represen- tatives of the contractor's commitments under this section, and shail post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. (4) The contractor will comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regu- lations and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. (5) The contractor will furnish all information and reports re- quired by Executivc Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by rules, regulations, and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and wiil permit access to its boolcs, records, and accounts by the adminisuring agency and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigarion to ascertain compli- ance with such rules, regulations, and orders. Fam Name and Address (6) In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of the said rules, regulations, or orders, this contract may be can- celed, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part and the contractor may be declazed ineligible for further Govern- � ment contracts or federally assisted construction contracts in accordance with procedures authorized in Exocutive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoked as provided in Executive Order 11246 of September 24,1965, or by rule, regulation, or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. (7) The contractor will include the portion of the sentence imine- diately pr�ceding paragraph (1) and tbe pmvisions of para- graphs (1) through (7) in every subconvact or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations, or orders of the Sec- ictary of Labor issued pursuant to section 204 of Ex�cutive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or veridor. The contractor wilt take such action with respect to any subcon- tract or purchase order as the administering agency may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions, including sanetions for noncompliance: Provided, however, That in the event a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened ' witk►, litigation with a subconuactor or vendor as a result of such direction by the administering agency the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. The applicant further aDrees that it will be bound by the abave �qua3 opportunity clause with respect W iu own employment practices when it participates in f�derally assisted construction work: Provided, That if che applicant so participating is a State or local government, the above equal opportunity clause is not applicable to any agency, inswmentality or subdivision of such government which does not participate in work on or under the contract. The applicant agrees that it will assist and cooporate activcly with the administering agency and the Secretary of Labor in obtaining the comgliance of convactors and subcontractors with the equal opportunity clause and the rules, regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor, that it wili furnish the administering agency and the Secretary of La[bor such information as they may require for the supervision of such compliance, and that it will otherwise assist the administering agency in the discharge of the agency's primary responsibility for securing compliance. The applicant furtber agrees that it will refrain from cntering into any contract or contract modification subject to Ezecutive Order 11246 of September 24,1965, with a contractor debarred from. or who has not demonstrated eligibility for, Govemment contracts and Federally-assisted construction contracts pursuant to the Executive order and will carry out such sanctions and penalties for violation of the equal opportuaity clause as may be imposcd ey Title fortn HUD-92010 (1/8Z) 43 VA forrt, 26-42, upon contractors and subcontractors by the administering agency or the Secretary of Labor pursuant to Part II, Subpart D of the Executive order. In addition, the applicant agrees tha[ if it fails or ref�ses to comply with these undertakings, the administering agency may take any or all of the following actions: Cancel, terminate, or suspend in whole or in part this a ant (contract, loan, insurancc, guarantee); refrain from extending any further assis= tance to the appiicant under the program with respect to which the failure or refund occurred ¢ntil satisfactory assurance of future compliance has been received from such applicant; and refer the case to the Department of Justice for appropriate legal proceedings. Excerpt from HUD Regulations . 200.410Definitioa of term "applicant". (a) In multifamily housing transactions where controls over the mortgagor ar� exercised by the Commissioner either through the ownership of corporate stock or under the provisions of a regulatory agreement, the term "applicant" as usad in this subpart shall mean tha mortgagor. (b) In transactions other than those specified in paragraph{a) of this section, the term "applicant" as used in this subpart shall mean the builder, dealer or contractor perfotming the con- struccion, repair or rehabilitacion work for th� mortgagor or other borrower. 200.420Equa1 Opportunity Clause to be included in contracu and subconuacts. (a) The following eqnal opportunity clause shall be included in each contraci and subcontract which is not exempt: During the perfotmance of this contract, the contractor agrees as follows: (1) The contractor will not discriminate against any em- ployee or applicant for employment because of race. croed, color, or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensured that applicants are employed, and that employees are troated during employment without regard to their race, cr�ed. color, or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: employmen[, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or ter•mination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including ap- prenticeship. The contractor agrees �to post in conspicuous places. available to employees and applicants for employ- ment, notices to be provided setting forth the provisions of the nondiscrimination clause. (2)The contractor will in all solicitations or advertisements for employaes placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideradon for employment without regard race, cr�ed, color, or national origin. (3) . The contractor will send to each labor unioa or repre- sentative of workers with which he has a collective bargain- ing agreement or other contract oi anderstandin.g, a notice� to be provided, advising the said labor union or workers' repre- sentative of the contractor's commitments under this section, and shall post copies of the notices in conspicuous places available to employees and appticants for employment. (4) The contractor will comply with all provisions of Ex- ccutive Order 10925 of March 61961, as amended, and of the regulations, and relevant orders of the President's Commit- tee on EquaI Empioyment Opportunity created thereby. (5) The conuactor will fumish al] information and reporu required by Executive Order 10925 of March 6, 1961, as amended, and by the regulations, and orders of the said Cotnmittee , or pursuant thereto, and will pemut access to his books, records, and accounts by HUD and the Committee for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such regulations, and orders. (6) In the event of the contractor's non-compliance with the nondiscrimination clause of this contract or with any of the said regulations, or orders, this contract may be can- celled, terminated or suspended in whole or in part and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further Govem= ment contracts or Federally-assisted construction contracts in accordance with pro.cedures authorized in Executive Order 10925 of March 6,1961, as amcnde, and such other sanctions may be imposed and remedies invoke s provided in the said Executive Order or by regulations, or order of the President' s Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity, or as other- wise provided by law. (7) The contractor will include the provisions of Para- graphs(1) through (7) in every subcontract or purchase order unless ezempted by regulations, or orders of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity issued pursu- ant to.Section 303 of Executive Order 10925 of March 6, 1961, as amended, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vender. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase orders as HCTD may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance: Provided, however, that in the event the contractor becomes involved ia, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or vender as a result of such d'uection by HUD, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. (b) Except in subcontracts for the performance of construction work at the site of construction, the clause is not roquired to be inserted in subcontracts below the second tier. Subcontracts may incorpora[e by referenced to t6c equa( opportunity clause. 200.425Modification in and exemptions from the regulations in this subpart. (a) The following transactions and contracts are exempt from the rcgulations in this subpart: (1) Loans, mortgages, contracts and subcontracts not ex- cceding $10,000. (2) Contract and subcontracu not exceeding $100,000 for standard commercial supplies or raw material; (3)Contracu and subcontracu under which work is to be or has been performed ouuide the United States and where no recruit- ment of workers within the United States in involved. To the extent that work pursuant to such contracts is done within the Untied States, the equal opportuniry clause shall be applicable; (4) Contracts for the sale of Government property where no appreciable amount of work is involvtd; and (5) Contracts and subcontracu for an indefinite quantity which are not to extend for ore than one yeaz if the purchaser determines that the amounts to be ordered 'under any such contract or subcontract are not reasonably expected to exceed $100,000 in the case of contracts or subcontracts for standard commercial supplies and raw materials, or $10,000 in the case of all other contracu and subcontracts. A A form HUD-920�0 (1/82) `t`t VA form 26-421 � a �mr aF FRIDLEY Date: To: From: Subject: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 13, 2005 June 8, 2005 William Burns, City Manager Paul Bolin, Asst. Executive HRA Director Resolution to Set Public Hearing to Create TIF District M-05-44 As you are aware from past projects, there are a number of steps needed to create the TIF districts necessary to move development projects forward. The attached resolution calls for setting the date of August 8t" for the Council to hold the public hearing needed to create TIF District #18. Staff recommends that the Council approves the resolution approving August gtn as the date to hold the public hearing for the creation of the TIF district necessary to proceed with the Gateway West project. H:AMy Documents\Paperless Agenda\2005 Council Dates\6-13-05\GatewayTIFHEARINGtMemo.doc RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON MODIFICATIONS TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NOS. 1-3, 6-7 AND 9-17, CREATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 18 AND APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN RELATING THERETO. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Public Hearing. 1.01. This Council shall meet on Monday, August 8, 2005, commencing at approximately 7:30 o'clock p.m. at City Hall, 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, to hold a public hearing on the following: (a) modification of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1(the "Project Area") to reflect increased project costs and increased bonding authority within the Project Area; (b) modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1-3, 6-7 and 9-17 (the "Existing TIF Districts") to reflect increased project costs and increased bonding authority within the Project Area; and (c) creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 18 and approval and adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan relating thereto, all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 and 469.174 to 469.1799, inclusive, as amended and supplemented. 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, the modified Tax Increment Financing Plans and the proposed Tax Increment Financing Plan (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 day of June, 2005. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Page 2 - Resolution No. CERTIFICATION I, , the duly qualified Clerk of the City of Fridley, County of Anoka, State of Minnesota, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. passed by the City Council on the day of , 2005. CITY CLERK G:\WPDATA\F\FRIDLEY\61\TIF\RESOLUTION CALLING HEARING.DOC 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, August 8, 2005, commencing at approximately 7:30 o'clock p.m. at City Hall, 6431 University Avenue N.E., Fridley, Minnesota, to hold a public hearing on the following: (a) modification of the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1(the "Project Area") to reflect increased project costs and increased bonding authority within the Project Area; (b) modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos. 1-3, 6-7 and 9-17 (the "Existing TIF Districts") to reflect increased project costs and increased bonding authority within the Project Area; and (c) creation of Tax Increment Financing District No. 18 and approval and adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan relating thereto, all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 and 469.174 to 469.1799, inclusive, as amended and supplemented. 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. The property proposed to be included in Tax Increment Financing District No. 18 includes the following PINs.: 23-30-24-22-0129 23-30-24-22-0135 23-30-24-23-0014 23-30-24-22-0130 23-30-24-22-0136 23-30-24-23-0015 23-30-24-23-0129 23-30-24-22-0133 23-30-24-22-0150 23-30-24-23-0016 23-30-24-23-0130 and all adjacent streets, easements and rights-of-way: 23-30-24-22-0134 23-30-24-23-0013 23-30-24-23-0128 The attached map shows the boundaries of proposed Tax Increment Financing District No. 17, the area from which tax increment revenues may be generated, and the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1, the area in which the tax increment revenues may be expended. 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 (attach map) CITY OF FRIDLEY CREATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 18 (GATEWAY WEST) MONDAY, JUNE 13, 2005 COUNCIL MEETING adopt resolution calling for public hearing MONDAY, JUNE 20, 2005 NOTICE PROVIDED TO COUNTY COMMISSIONER (not less than 30 days prior to publication of notice of public hearing) THURSDAY, JULY 7, 2005 TIF PLAN PROVIDED TO ANOKA COUNTY AND SCHOOL DISTRICT(S) (not less than 30 days prior to public hearing) WEDNESDAY, JULY 13, 2005 THURSDAY, JULY 21, 2005 THURSDAY, JULY 28, 2005 THURSDAY, AUGUST 4, 2005 MONDAY, AUGUST 8, 2005 MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 2005 G:\WPDATA\F\FRIDLEY\61\TIF\CHRONOLOGY.DOC PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE DELIVERED FOR PUBLICATION FIRST PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PUBLISHED (not less than 10 days nor more than 30 days prior to public hearing) SECOND PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PUBLISHED (not less than 10 days nor more than 30 days prior to public hearing) HRA MEETING (i) review and approve modifications to Redevelopment Plan and existing TIF Plans (ii) create TIF District No. 18 (iii) adopt TIF Plan CITY COUNCIL MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING (i) review modifications to Redevelopment Plan existing TIF Plans (ii) review creation of TIF District No. 18 accompanying TIF Plan and and COUNCIL MEETING/APPROVAL CONSIDERATION (i) approve modifications to Redevelopment Plan and existing TIF Plans (ii) create TIF District No. 18 (iii) adopt TIF Plan � � CffY OF FRIDLEY i'�: FROM.� AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITYMANAGER RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT.• FINAL CHANGES INAPPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004 DATE: June 8, 2005 Attached you will find the final changes in the appropriations to the budget for the year ended December 31, 2004. These changes are similar to those that we have brought to Council this time of year for the past number of years as we prepare to publish the City of Fridley's Annual Financial Report. These changes are in keeping with Chapter 7 of the City Code. The maj ority of the changes are based on departmental initiatives that have caused an increase in efficiency of the department or a better delivery of service to our customers. The changes to the General Fund are occurring either from within departmental budgets or drawing from the Emergency Reserve. In no case is this increasing the overall General Fund Budget. The changes that are shown in a few of the Special Revenue Funds are because these are funds that traditionally have not been established as part of the normal budgeting process due to the unknown aspect of each of their activities. Staff's recommendation is for the City Council to pass the attached resolution and complete the budget cycle for 2004. RESOL UT/O/V /VO. - 2005 A RESOLUTIONAUTHORIZING FINAL CHANGES INAPPROPRIATIONS FOR THE GENERAL FUND, SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS, AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED 2004 WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has involved itself in initiatives that provide for future charges and modifications that will allow for a better delivery of services, and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley had not incorporated these and other necessary changes into the adopted budget for 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, and Capital Improvement Fund budgets for the following divisions be amended as follows: GENERAL FUND MARI�ET VALUE REVENLTE ADJUSTMENTS PROPERTY TAXES ($517,543) HOMESTEAD CREDIT 1NTERGOVERNIVIENT MARI�ET VALUE AL 517,543 HOMESTEAD CREDIT TOTAL REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS $0 APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS OTHER COMMISSIONS HUMAN RESOURCES ELECTIONS I: SUPPLIES/CHARGES PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES POLICE PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES OTHER FINANCING USES ELIMINATE NEGATIVE $39 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE 801 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE 29 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE 792 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE 207 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE 107,429 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE (78,738) VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE (31,731) VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE 28,343 VARIANCE TRANSFER TO GRANT 3,388 MGMNT MUN. CENTER � � �� - �' � - P.WORKS/STREETS NATURE CTR BUILDING 1NSPECTION NONDEPARTMENTAL EMERGENCY RESERVE TOTAL APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS CABLE TV FUND REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES ELIMINATE NEGATNE 457 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE (457) VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE 8,717 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE (8,717) VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE (24,942) VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE 28,293 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE 6,919 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE (2,147) VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE 3,213 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE 16,209 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE (9,913) VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE 9,913 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE (58,104) VARIANCE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS LICENSES APPROPRIATION AD7USTMENTS PERSONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES/CHARGES $0 ELIMINATE NEGATIVE $31,644 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE $4,040 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE 27,604 VARIANCE TOTAL APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS GRANT MANAGEMENT FUND $31,644 1NTERGOVERNIVIENT ELIMINATE NEGATIVE REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS AL $237,395 VARIANCE OTHER FINANCING TRANSFER FROM SOURCES 3,388 POLICE TOTAL REVENUE AD7USTMENTS $240,783 ELIMINATE NEGATNE APPROPRIATION AD7USTMENTS PERSONAL SERVICES $48,742 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE SUPPLIES/CHARGES 192,041 VARIANCE TOTAL APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS HRA REIMBURSEMENT FUND REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS $240,783 1NTERGOVERNIVIENT AL $19,935 UNBUDGETED ACTIVITY APPROPRIATION AD7USTMENTS SUPPLIES/CHARGES $19,935 UNBUDGETED ACTIVITY SOLID WASTE ABATEMENT FUND CHARGES FOR ELIMINATE NEGATNE REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS SERVICES $19,961 VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATNE APPROPRIATION AD7USTMENTS PERSONAL SERVICES ($5,038) VARIANCE ELIMINATE NEGATIVE SUPPLIES/CHARGES 24,999 VARIANCE TOTAL APPROPRIATION ADJUSTMENTS DRUG/GAlV�L1NG FORFEITURE FUND REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS $19,961 F1NES AND FORFEITS $3,484 UNBUDGETED ACTIVITY APPROPRIATION AD7USTMENTS SUPPLIES/CHARGES $27,649 UNBUDGETED ACTIVITY F.C.C. DONATIONS FUND 1NVESTMENT REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS 1NCOME $1,405 UNBUDGETED ACTIVITY APPROPRIATION AD7USTMENTS SUPPLIES/CHARGES $5,292 UNBUDGETED ACTIVITY CAPITAL PROJECT FUNDS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND MARI�ET VALUE REVENLTE ADJUSTMENTS PROPERTY TAXES ($7,785) HOMESTEAD CREDIT 1NTERGOVERNIVIENT MARI�ET VALUE AL 7,785 HOMESTEAD CREDIT TOTAL REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS $0 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS _ DAY OF , 2005. SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK � � CffY OF FRIDLEY To From AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF J U N E 13, 2005 William W. Burns, City Manager Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk Date: June 7, 2005 Re: Approval to Withhold Sale of Tax Forfeit Land and Initiate Request for Application to Acquire Tax Forfeit Land for Right-of-Way Purposes Staff received a letter and Resolution from Anoka County classifying certain tax forfeit lands in the county. The city has one piece of tax forfeit property that has been classified by the County. The classified property has been identified by the City Engineer as a very small piece of land currently located under street at the corner of Regis Lane and Fillmore Street. The city is required to approve the classification and sale of forfeit parcels that lie within their jurisdiction within 60 days of receipt of the letter from the County. If disapproval of any parcel is not made within 60 days, it is deemed the city has approved the classification and sale. If the city desires to acquire the parcel, it shall, within 60 days of the request for classification and sale approval, file a written request with the county board to withhold the parcel from sale and initiate an application to acquire the parcel. The county board will then withhold the parcel from sale for six months. If the city does not acquire the property within six months, the county may offer it for sale upon expiration of the withholding period. Because the classified parcel is located under a street, staff recommends that the city acquire the parcel for right-of-way purposes. Staff recommends a motion withholding sale of tax forfeit land identified by Anoka County PIN No. 24-30-24-31-0111 and directing staff to initiate a request for an application to acquire tax forfeit parcel for right-of-way purposes. � � �rr aF FRIDLEY Name Steven Monsrud AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 Position Sergeant Non-exempt Appointment Starting Salary $33.99 per hour (2005 contract) Robert PatrolOfficer $17.95 Larson Non-exempt per hour (2005 contract) Starting Date June 14, 2005 June 15, 2005 Replaces Michelle Gease Steven Monsrud � AGENDA ITEM � COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 �ffY �F FRIDLEY CLAIMS 121737 - 122038 � � CJTi' OF FRIDLEi` AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 LICENSES LIGENSE RENEWALS Type of License By FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Old Country Buffet 6540 University Av NE Fridley, MN 55432 Target Stores 755 53rd Av N E Fridley, MN 55432 TOBACCO SALES Fridley Liquor 6289 Hwy 65 N E Fridley, MN 55432 Fridley Liquor 248 57t" Av N E Fridley, MN 55432 JUNK YARD Copart Auto Auctions 3737 East River Rd. Fridley, MN 55432 Approved By Ronald M. Johns Public Safety Director Community Development Director Fire Inspector Jack Reif Public Safety Director Community Development Director Fire Inspector Kyle Birkholz Public Safety Director Community Development Director Fire Inspector Kyle Birkholz Public Safety Director Community Development Director Fire Inspector Willis Johnson Public Safety Director Community Development Director Fire Inspector Building Inspector USED MOTOR VEHICLES Copart of Connecticut Paul Styer 3737 East River Rd Fridley, MN 55432 MASSEUR / MASSEUSE CERTIFICATE Teresa Kaus 2518 Quincy St NE Minneapolis, MN 55418 (Wellspring Chiropractic 6425 Hwy 65 N E Fridley, MN 55432) Public Safety Director Community Development Director Public Safety Director LICENSES (CONTINUED) 49'ER DAYS Type of License By TEMPORARY INTOXICATING LIQUOR Fridley Wrestling Boosters Todd Christenson 5860 5t" St N E Fridley, MN 55432 TEMPORARY FOOD SALES Taulelle Concession Richard Taulella 6120 Trinity Dr. NE Fridley, MN 55432 CARNIVAL LICENSE Gold Star Amusements 9748 Vale St. Coon Rapids, MN 55448 rv�w �rc�n►s�s Michael Featherstone Approved By Public Safety Director Public Safety Director Fire Inspector Planning Assistant Public Safety Director Fire Inspector Building Inspector PEDDLER'S LICENSE /INTERSTATE COMMERCE SOLICITOR Melissa Books Public Safety Director 11469 Zea St NW Planning Assistant Coon Rapids, MN 55433 (Childrens Educational Books/Software) PEDDLER / SOLICITOR OR TRANSIENT MERCHANT Mark Jenson Public Safety Director 7564 Spring Lake Rd. Planning Assistant Moundsvie, MN 55112 (Walter's Recycling & Refuse, Inc.) � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF � �F June 13, 2005 FRIDLEY Contractor T e A licant A roved B A-Line Construction Residential Contractor Rodney Engrbretson State of MN American Mechanical Co, Inc Plumbing Paul Schumachez State of MN Cedar Plumbing Plumbing Don Erickson State of MN Cente oint Ener Minne asco Heatin Ron Hurkman Ron Julkowski, CBO Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco Gas Services Ron Hurkman Ron Julkowski, CBO Duell Electric Electrical Mike Duell State of MN Egress & Glass Block Window Masonry Kent Klesceski Ron Julkowski, CBO Ex erts Emmet Electric, LLC Electrical Tedd Emmet Adelsman State of MN Paul Klingbeil Construction Residential Contractor Paul Klingbeil State of MN Maverick Construction Residential Contractor Larry Der State of MN Moon Roofin Residential Contractor Thomas Moone State of MN Nelson Electric, Inc Electrical Jim Krzesowiak State of MN Simeon Peterson Electric, Inc Electrical Simeon Peterson State of MN Priority Heating & Cooling, Inc Heating James Haugen Ron Julkowski, CBO Riccar Heating & Air Conditioning Heating Krista Buth Ron Julkowski, CBO Riccar Heatin & Air Conditionin Gas Services Krista Buth Ron Julkowski, CBO R an Plumbin & Heatin Plumbin Gre R an State of MN Snell Mechanical Inc Heating Mike Jackson Ron Julkowski, CBO Snell Mechanical Inc Gas Services Mike Jackson Ron Julkowski, CBO David Schweich Residential Contractor David Schweich State of MN Tem esta Mason , Inc Mason Wade Tem esta Ron Julkowski, CBO ProBuilt America dba Window Residential Contractor Terence C. Derosren State of MN World, Inc � � �ffY �F FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 ESTI MATES Michels Corporation 16500 West Rogers Drive New Berlin, WI 53151 Sanitary and Storm Sewer Lining Proj ect No. 3 54 FINAL ESTIMATE ............................................................................ $ 66,754.40 Palda & Sons, Inc. 1462 Dayton Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 2005 Neighborhood Street Improvement ProjectNo. ST. 2005 — 1 Estimate No. 1 ....................................... Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 1451 Stagecoach Road Shakopee, MN 55379 73rd Avenue Improvement Proj ect No. ST. 2005 — 2 Estimate No. 1 ................ ........................................... $152,597.82 ................................................................... $140,321.69 � � CffY OF FRIaLEI' AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OFJUNE 13, 2005 Date: June 9, 2005 To: From Subject: William Burns, City Manager Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Public Hearing for Rezoning, ZOA #05-02, John DeMello, Family Lifestyle Development Corporation. M-05-47 INTRODUCTION John DeMello of Family Lifestyle Development Corporation is requesting a plat to create one new parcel from 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), and 6461 Central Avenue (vacant). Mr. DeMello is also requesting a rezoning for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and the north property line of the adjacent properties along 64tn Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the June 3, 2005, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for ZOA #05-02. After receiving public comment and a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of ZOA, #05-02, with 23 stipulations as presented. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. Anoka County City staff and the petitioner met with Anoka County to review the comments and concerns the County had and to review the revised site plan for Spring Valley Estates. The County has stated that they are amenable to this redesigned plan and would permit access on Central Avenue as a right in and right out, as well as allow an access on to Mississippi Street as proposed by the developer. The County stated that currently there are no imminent plans for reconstruction of either Central Avenue or Mississippi Street, nor are there any imminent plans to signalize the intersection. However, it is still important to plan for the future conditions as development plans are considered for approval. Please see letter from Anoka County included in your packet. Rice Creek Watershed - wetland The petitioner and his consultant met with the Rice Creek Watershed District City staff received a notice of exemption from the Rice Creek Watershed, on March 25, 2004. The exception was approved as it appears that the wetland was incidentally created and is not protected under the Wetland Conservation Act. The developer met with interested neighbors to discuss the revised plan. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION Like, the Town Center Development proposal, this master plan has been modified to address concerns raised by the Planning Commission, City Council and the neighborhood. City Staff recommends approval of the new site plan, and the rezoning request, with the subsequent master plan. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of all land use requests above: 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A-5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64t" Avenue, and 1357 64t" Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building perm it. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for storm water run- off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13.A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 23. The Developer shall provide walkway access across the site for pedestrian connections at the north, west, and south sides of the property. � _ . June 8, 2005 To Mayor Lund and City Council members: Re: Demello project. I am at a loss to understand what more the people who reside here have to do to convince.you that we do not want another huge edifice in our neighborhood. We did not want Town Developement. No matter that they use less land and 1 story less. A11 the � problems that they admitted to at the planning commission meeting are not resolved. They have changed�their name, changed _ their plan, have NO solid master plan. (An elevator at both ends of that huge building? Residents in the middle will have a long walk to their apartment. They did not elucidate some of the stipulations from the previous project- i.e. definitive age of residents, limit of rental units, etc.) It strikes me as a mishmash of what the developer wants / what the architect wants / and most of all what Staff wan�s. Staff has been assidiously working with them to attain what they want, with little regard for the people who reside here. We want to keep thr neighbo�hood with as many single family dwellings as we can. As an aside, the findings of the Housing Forum do not reflect our goalssThe close work Staff has done with Demello does not reflect our goals. But, if you agree with them, allow me to play SEER and predict what this neighborhood will become within 5'years. Mostl� rental. (at least 7 homes on Pierce and Dellwood are for sale or for rent right now because of these developments, Also some on Lucia Lane and Mississippi. Gradual erosion of upkeep resulting in slum conditions. If this is what the camp � ._ ., plan and Staff want, Lord help us all! Demello and Staff are using the state of flux to confuse the issue. i.e. - last years project was 45 feet in height. This one is 35 feet in height. But th�2 berm is 8 feet high, then the building, so the actt�al height is 43 feet. Being 35 feet is stressed in the presentation, but not the actual height. When something is presented without the height and density of this project, I am sure we would be amenable and certainly � more receptive to something that did not ruin the composition of the neighborhood and not crammed down our throats by an over-zealous Staff. Until then, I entreat you to consider the impact this project will have on our neighborhood and future similar projects in other family neighborhoods in Fridley. I thank you for your acknowledgement of our concerns. t _ ,� � Marvel McNaughton 6300 Pierce St.N.E. Fridley, Mn. 55432 . ORDINANCE NO. -2005 ORDINANCE APPROVING A REZONING ZOA #OS-02, FROM G1, LOCAL BUSINESS, C-2, GENERAL BUSINESS AND R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO S-2, REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON LOTS 15 —19, SPRING VALLEY, GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF MISSISSIPPI STREET AND OLD CENTRAL, FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA BY MAHING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS The Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows: SECTION 1 SECTION 2 Appendix D of the Fridley City Code is amended hereinafter as indicated. LOTS 15-19, BLOCK 1, SPRING VALLEY, GENERALLY LOCATED AT CORNER OF MISSISSIPPI STREET AND OLD CENTRAL, FRIDLEY Is hereby designated to be in the Zoned District S-2 (Redevelopment District). SE CTION 3. That the Zoning Administrator is directed to change the official zoning map to show said tract or areato be rezoned from Zoned District G1 (Local Business), C-2 (General Business District), and R-1, (Single Family Residential) to S-2, (Redevelopment District). PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 13th DAY OF JUNE, 2005. SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK Public Hearing: June 13, 2005 First Reading: June 27, 2005 Second Reading: July 11, 2005 Publication: July 21, 2005 ATTACHMENT 1 Stipulations for Rezoning Request ZOA #04-01, John DeMello, Profitmax, Inc.: 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A-5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A- 9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64t" Avenue, and 1357 64t" Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run-off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13.A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 23. The Petitioner shall provide walkway access around the site for pedestrian connections at the north, west, and south side of property. City of Fridley Land Use Application ZOA #05-02 & PS #05-02 May 25, 2005 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Family Lifestyle Development Corporation John DeMello 2872 17th Terrace N W New Brighton MN 55112 Requested Action: Rezone property from C-1, C-2, and R-1 to S-2. Reqlat Location: 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6441 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue Existing Zoning: 1314 Mississippi St. — C-2, General Business 1340 Mississippi St. — R-1, Single Family 6421 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business & R-1, Single Family 6441 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business & R-1 Single Family 6461 Central Avenue — C-2, General Business Size: Approximate size of entire area to be rezoned and replatted: 159,460 sq. ft. 3.66 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family homes, small commercial building (garage), and vacant land Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Commercial building & C-2 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Single Family homes & C-1 and R-1 W: Vacant land and Restaurant & S-2 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Future Land Use Map designates this area as Redevelopment. Zoning History: 1314 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1952 — House is built. 1959 — Detached garage built. 1340 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage constructed pre-1949. 6421 Central Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage built prior to 1949. SPECIAL INFORMATION 6461 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot 1941 — Lot is platted. 6441 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot. 1941 — Lot is platted. 1969 — Proposal to build a Tastee-Freez. 1998 — Rezoning request from C-1 to R-1, withdrawn prior to Planning Commission. Legal Description of Property: 1340 Mississippi Street: Lot 15, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1314 Mississippi Street: Lot 16, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6461 Central Avenue: Lot 17, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6441 Central Avenue: Lot 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6421 Central Avenue: Lot 19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition Council Action / 60 Day Date: City Council — June 13, 2005 60-Day Date — June 27, 2005 SUMMARY OF REQUEST The petitioner, John DeMello, of Family Lifestyle Development Corp., is requesting to replat and rezone the properties located at 1314 Mississippi St., 1340 Mississippi St., 6421 Central Ave., 6441 Central Ave., 6461 Central Ave. from C-1, Local Business, C-2 General Business, and R-1 Single Family to S-2 Redevelopment District for the purpose of redevelopment, to allow for a Senior Housing Development/Retail mixed-use development. SU M MARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this plat, rezoning and subsequent master plan request. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. • Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. • Provides additional job opportunities. Staff Report Prepared by: Julie Jones ZOA#05-02 & PS#05-02 Spring Valley Estates Overview Summary of Applications John DeMello of Family Lifestyle Development Corporation is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to construct a mixed use retail/senior housing complex on the southeast corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The two actions that have been requested are a Plat and a Rezoning. Both of these applications, and the master plan approval, will be examined individually in this report. A Plat has been requested to create one new parcel, combining existing lots located at 1340 and 1314 Mississippi Street, and 6461, 6441 (vacant), and 6421 Central Avenue. A 10,492 square foot retail complex will occupy the lower level of the northeastern corner of the building with 70 condominium units occupying the remainder of the building. The petitioner is also requesting a rezoning for the newly created parcel. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings. The petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. ��1��[�� ,� � .,��' � i�� ' � � �' � � �� x � ' � � .: _` ' , �� x� ' �� : ' � : ` �; � � � *,�� m� ��: Proposed Project The petitioner is proposing to construct a 3-story complex, which incorporates a 10,492 square foot retail area on the lower level of the northwestern corner of the development. The petitioner has stated that he envisions that this complex will house neighborhood retail businesses, which could include businesses like a pharmacy, a coffee shop, an ice cream/sandwich shop or a hair salon. The retail complex will include 45 - 9 foot wide parking stalls for customers. The housing portion of the complex will have 70 condominium units for seniors. The proposed 70 units will be owner-occupied and comprised of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units. There are a variety of unit styles and sizes with some including a den. The residential development will include 110 underground parking stalls and 12 surface parking stalls. The petitioner plans to model the exterior of both projects after an Italian villa. The site will include a storm water pond with landscaping that surrounds the property. Site History The proposed development area is located on the southeast corner of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue. The area consists of 2 vacant lots, which are located on Central Avenue and 4 homes that were constructed prior to 1952, 2 of which are located on Mississippi Street and the other 2 are located on Central Avenue. The petitioners' father, Frank DeMello purchased the vacant parcel located 6461 Central Avenue, 25 years ago. When the property at 1314 Mississippi Street came up for sale over the summer of 2003, the petitioner purchased it with the hope of developing the land. The petitioner then contacted surrounding property owners to see if they would be interested in selling their properties. When the neighboring property owners became interested in selling their properties, the petitioner came forward with a redevelopment proposal in the spring of 2004. The previous plat and rezoning applications were denied. The 2004 proposal included the creation of two separate parcels and included three additional lots down to 64th Avenue with the retail portion of the development being a separate building and parcel. The housing portion of the proposal was to build a 90-unit, four-story, senior condominium complex. The retail portion of the development included plans for 13,750 sq. ft. of commercial retail space. The City Council denied this proposal, citing that the density was too high, creating potential traffic problems with traffic existing onto 64th Avenue, limiting landscaping opportunities, and limiting the possibility of adequate snow storage areas. Analysis Rezoning Application ZOA #OS-02 The petitioner is requesting a rezoning and master plan approval for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street south to and including 6421 Old Central Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. The properties requesting to be rezoned are 1340 Mississippi Street (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family), 1314 Mississippi Street (single family home and garage (welding shop), zoned C-2, General Business), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant lot, zoned C-2, General Business), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant lot, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family), and 6421 Central Avenue (single family home, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family). The petitioner is proposing to redevelop these five parcels. Zoning Map — Shows mix of zoning and properties to be replatted and rezoned. As the properties exist today, 6441 and 6421 Central Avenue have split zoning between C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family. While both of the lots are rather large in size, conflicts arise when the zoning is split between a commercial and residential zoning at an arbitrary point in the lot. Rezoning a property to S-2 Redevelopment District, requires that the accompanying site plan become the master plan for the site. If the rezoning and master plan were approved by the City 2 Council any modification of the site plan would need to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Review of the master plan also needs to be completed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority as the property is in a Redevelopment District. Comprehensive Plan — Future Land Use and Housing Chapters The City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. State Statute gives the City the authority to "rezone" property from one designated use to another, so long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000 and is a"tool intended to help guide future growth and development of the community...lt is a plan because it contains goa/s, policies and strategies that all work together, looking to the future and working towards achieving a community wide vision". In order for a rezoning to be viewed favorably, it must be in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed retail complex, senior owner-occupied condominium complex and rezoning of the properties meet several of the objectives the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the Comprehensive Plan. The area of Old Central between Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road was identified as an area for future redevelopment. The purpose of redevelopment is to provide the opportunity for more efficient land uses and eliminate inefficient land uses and under utilized parcels. Redevelopment can a/so provide an opportunity to build new facilities, meet current market demands and desires of the City, creates new tax base, and creates additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the rezoning of these properties. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states that for this portion of Old Central, "consideration should be made to replacing the current mix of single-family residential and commercial uses with higher density residential development that together with the health club may serve as an attractive residential location for move-up housing". The Comprehensive Plan also states that for projects in these redevelopment areas requiring rezoning that the S-2 zoning designation "would be the appropriate Zoning district to implement for the redevelopment project. The intent of the district is to provide the City with site plan review authority to determine if the proposed project meets the goa/s and objectives of the City's Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plans". The Comprehensive Plan, in both the Future Land Use & the Housing chapters, addresses the desire for a variety of housing types in a number of goals listed below. • Ensure that adequate opportunities exist for the development of a variety of housing types at a range of affordability levels including low, low-moderate and high cost housing to meet the life-cycle needs of Fridley residents. • Create sustainable, self-reliant, mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhoods that contribute positively to the quality of life and image of Fridley. • Ensure a variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life cycle. • Strengthen neighborhoods and improve upon the quality of the City's housing stock. • Diversify the housing supply to include move up housing both in the form of rental and owner occupied housing. As Fridley's residents continue to age, demand will increase for "empty nester" and senior housing. There will be an increased demand for senior rental, senior owned condominium/town homes, and assisted living facilities. The proposed project, 70 senior owner-occupied condominium units, will meet some of the current demand for those seniors seeking alternatives to their current housing type. Rezoning these properties helps to achieve the Comprehensive Plan's goal for this area. � Housing Market Study The petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc. in 2003 to complete a Market Feasibility Study for Senior Housing in Fridley. The demographic and competitive market analysis done by Maxfield was updated in March 2004, and, again in March 2005. The latest updated remarks from Maxfield indicates that there continues to be a demand in the Fridley area for senior condominium housing units. Maxfield's research is taking into account the planned Town Center project across Central Avenue, which is yet to begin construction. The original, base housing market study pointed out that given the competitive situation in the marketplace, the quality of the subject site, and the lack of for-sale product within three miles of the property, the senior condominium project would be the most marketable product for the site. Their research also showed that the subject site could best support an age-restricted owner- occupied development such as a condominium or cooperative of around 70 units. Maxfield's updated figures indicate suggested sale prices to be $156,000 for the smallest one- bedroom unit to $279,000 for the largest three-bedroom unit. They expect the entire housing portion of the project to sell out in 22 months. Plat Application #OS-02 John DeMello, Family Lifestyle Development Corporation, is seeking to replat the properties located at 1340 Mississippi Street, 1314 Mississippi Street, 6461 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, and 6421 Central Avenue to create one new consolidated lot. The proposed plat will consist of one lot; Lot 1, Block 1, Spring Valley Estates. This is different than the 2004 proposal which created two new lots, one accommodating the retail portion of the development and one containing the housing portion of the project. Looking south on Old Central toward project area Rezoning a property to S-2, Redevelopment District allows for the maximum flexibility for a redevelopment project. The petitioner has designed their project to meet the zoning classification codes most similar to their intended use. This would be C-2, General Business, zoning for the retail portion of the project and R-3, General Multiple Unit Housing, for the residential portion of the project. The retail portion of the proposed development is 10,492 square feet and meets all the parking requirements for the number of parking stalls required for a retail use under the speculative parking ratio requirements. Proof of parking for an additional 8 parking stalls is also provided. Staff is satisfied with this amount of parking for the commercial part of the development. � The housing portion of the project is 120,196 square feet in size with all three floors combined. This is a density of 21 units per acre. The petitioner is proposing to construct 70 senior owner- occupied condominium units. The development will include 110 underground parking stalls and 12 surface parking stalls. This amount of parking meets the requirement for an independent living facility. However, staff considers this project to fall somewhere in between the category of senior assisted living and market rate housing parking requirements. Market rate parking requirements would be for a total of 129 parking spaces. The petitioner is proposing at total of 122 parking stalls, which is 7 units shy of the market rate requirements. Staff believes the amount of stalls provided should be adequate since some households occupying this complex would be expected to have only one vehicle. Staff finds the lot coverage proposed to be reasonable for a mixed use development. Code requires no more than 30% lot coverage for multi-unit residential and commercial properties. The proposed project shows 28% lot coverage, meeting requirements for both zoning types. Early discussions with Anoka County indicated that additional right-of-way on Central Avenue and Mississippi Street will be required for future reconstruction purposes. They anticipate that a 120 ft. right-of-way corridor will be required for both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersections in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. The County assumes when the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection is reconstructed, it would be centered in the 120 ft. right-of-way corridor. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and 10 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. Therefore, staff assumes that the County will be requesting that at this time, both of the right-of-ways be dedicated. The petitioner has drawn the site plan to illustrate right-of-way acquisition along both County Roads. Due to necessity of right-of-way acquisition, the drive lane on the west side of the development will be only two feet from the west property line. The parking setback on the north side of the development, which is considered the front yard of this site layout, meets the minimum 35' setback. The building is 34' in height to the mid-span of the roof line. Therefore, the building only requires a 15' side yard setback on the east side, but an 18' setback is provided. The additional 3' of side yard setback was provided on the east side of the project, because fire truck access may be required. The 18' setback, combined with an 8' public right of way that runs along the east property line, would provide 26' of clearance for the possibly required fire truck access. The rear yard setback of 40' on the south side has also been met. As stated above, due to the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setbacks can be recognized under this rezoning master plan approval. The proposal as submitted does not meet the landscaping requirements of City Code, however. According to code, 160 trees will be required for this development. The petitioner is proposing to provide 91 trees. Code also requires at minimum that 30% of the trees be coniferous. This would be 48 of the 160 trees required. The petitioner has met this requirement in the proposal by providing 49 conifers. The petitioner is proposing to add rain garden plantings to the ponding areas in lieu of some of the tree landscaping requirement. Staff would like to encourage the rain garden plantings, but would like to see more trees planted on the property as well. There currently is very little landscaping proposed on the south end of the plat. There are also possibilities to save some of the existing trees that could reduce the 160 tree requirement. Traffc Study Staff utilized a number of sources to determine the possible impacts that 70 senior owner occupied condominium units and the commercial complex may have on the local traffic patterns. Staff consulted the Transportation chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and reviewed the traffic study supplied by TDI, Traffic Date Incorporated. � Comprehensive Plan — Transportation Chapter The City's Comprehensive Plan indicated that in 2001, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed senior condominiums carried 8,000 vehicles per day and, at this traffic level, was only carrying 57% of the traffic for which the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates Old Central carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2020, based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles / day, Old Central will be carrying 71 % if the maximum amount of traffic for which the roadway was designed. Review of Traffc Impact Report Prepared by TDI, Inc. Family Lifestyle Development Corporation hired TDI, Traffic Data Incorporated, a Data Collection, Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning firm to perform a traffic analysis in 2004. The analysis was regarding the proposal for more housing units and more retail space than the current proposal. The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, which was published in December 2003. At that time, the consultants used the SeniorAdult Housing Attached category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed senior complex would generate a total of 247 trips per day. The consultants used the Specialty Retail Center category from the ITE manual and determined that the proposed retail complex would generate a total of 598 trips per day. Trip Generation ITE Description Land Use 252 814 Senior Adult Housing — Attached (71 units) Specialty Retail Center — (13,500 sq. ft.) Daily Trips AM Peak Hour In Out 247 3 3 598 n/a n/a PM Peak Hour In Out 5 3 16 21 TDI developed traffic forecasts for the following 2005 scenarios: ➢ No Build (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Senior Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) ➢ Build Spring Valley Estates (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Senior Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) The finding of these forecasts show that the level of service at both the Central Avenue/64tn Avenue intersections and the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersections would remain the same in the no-build or build scenarios. The only change seen is during the AM Peak Hour at the Central Avenue/64th Avenue eastbound intersection, where the level of service would change from LOS B to LOS C. Central Avenue/64T" Avenue Westbound & Eastbound Approach LOS Results AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Westbound Eastbound Westbound Eastbound 2005 No-Build A B C C 2005 Build A C C C Mississi i Street/Central Avenue Intersection LOS Results Scenario AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 2005 No-Build 2005 Build C C D D L•� To complete the traffic study, the consultants also referred to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which governs the use of traffic control devices per Minnesota State Statute. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has eight criteria (called warrants) to consider when determining if a traffic signal should be installed at an intersection or not. These warrants are primarily based on the traffic volumes flowing through the intersection. A warrant analysis was conducted for the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. To complete this analysis, TDI staff performed a turning movement count from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. None of the eight warrants are met under the existing conditions, nor will they be met if the senior housing and retail buildings are constructed on the proposed site. According to this analysis, a traffic signal should not be installed at the intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue until at least one of the warrants is being met. The conclusions of TDI's analysis state that the stop controlled approaches at the Central Avenue/64th Avenue intersection operate at LOS C or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic control. The intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue will operate at LOS D or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic controls. A traffic signal was not currently warranted at the intersection and a traffic signal was not be warranted at the intersection after the previously proposed development would have been completed, according to the 2004 traffic study. The traffic study consultant was asked to submit comments regarding the traffic impacts of the current redevelopment proposal for less retail space and housing units. Their comments were summed up by the following statement: "As long as the proposed number of units and amount of retail space remains below the amount 1 initially studied, the roadway network will accommodate the seniorhousing development."A complete copy of the 2004 traffic study is available upon request. Wetland/Drainage The petitioner is still working with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) to finalize an agreement regarding the necessary permits needed for the project. The wetland that was of concern in last year's proposal has been exempted by the RCWD, so no replacement or mitigation is required. Revised storm water management plans are expected to resolve concerns that the City Engineering Department had over the initial set of plans submitted with the application. Comments Received During the public hearings for this development proposed last year, there was a great deal of Public input. Some of the concerns raised were regarding traffic and a guarantee that the tenants of the complex would be 55 or older. To alleviate those concerns ahead of time, the petitioner provided city staff with a traffic study and a copy of the proposed association documents upon submittal of the rezoning and plat request. Much of the concern, however, revolved around traffic onto 64th Avenue. The current development proposal no longer includes the properties along 64th Avenue and will not have access onto 64th Avenue. The petitioner held a neighborhood meeting on April 27 and is holding a second neighborhood informational meeting on May 27. Staff was not in attendance at either of these meetings. However, we have heard that concerns raised have mostly been about crime or traffic. Staff has received only a couple of calls to date in response to the public hearing notice, inquiring about the property. These callers were seeking information about the project, but did not exhibit any objections. Staff has also received a call from someone interested in buying a condominium unit. 7 Staff Recommendation City Staff recommends approval of this Rezoning ZOA #05-02 and accompanying site plan for the senior building and retail complex, with stipulations. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provides housing opportunities for seniors. • Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. • Provides additional job opportunities in Fridley City Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for PS#05-02, with stipulations. Stipulations Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of the above land use requests: 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan as shown on the site plan dated 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A7 and A8, titled Exterior Elevations, revised 5/19/05 and architectural plan A3, titled Building Plan Ground Level, dated 4/29/05. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the applicable fire code requirements in the International Fire Code. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Demolition permits shall be obtained for removal of the buildings at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street and 6421 Central. 7. Petitioner to provide revised Certificate of Exemption for wetland and to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner to submit revised storm water management plans and calculations for approval by the City Engineering staff. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain required NPDES Permit and Rice Creek Watershed District permits. 13. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 14. Final Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to the City Council public hearing regarding the rezoning on June 13, 2005. 15. Petitioner shall install a 7' high screening fence or planting screening along the east and south property lines, according to Section 205.14.6.G(1) of the Fridley Zoning Code. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,287.25 (142,924 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. : 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to finaf plat approval. 23. The Petitioner shall provide walkway access around the site for pedestrian connections at the north, west, and south sides of property. 9 76 June 1, 2005 1372 64�' Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Planning Commission City of Fridley Pla.nning Commission Members, We are u.nable to attend tonight's meeting due to the concurrently scheduled Fridley High School graduation ceremony. We wish to convey our adamant opposition to the la.test DeMello apartment building proposal and request for rezoning. DeMello's new proposal is in essence very similar to DeMello's ProfitMax proposal that the City Council overwhelmingly denied last year. It was widely expressed last yeaz tha.t this location was NOT an appropria.te place for an apartment building to be located, and nothing has changed. Thank you for your Mark Schwartz Jean Schwartz 77 May 26, 2005 Scott Lund, Mayor City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Mayor, I am opposed to the plan to rezone five parcels into one for the sole purpose of high density housing. Why doesn't it seem to matter what the citizens of Fridley really want? Our property is valuable to us and who would want to buy any of the houses that are in view of the project that is on the agenda. This is nothing more than greed for the developer and the City of Fridley. Not all people who retire can afford to live in the units that are proposed. Does that mean we are to be penalized not once, but twice, because the value of our home will depreciate. When the units are completed and are not rented out, what are your plans for filling the units? I've seen it happen many times when the units aren't being rented they take alternate routes such as Section 8, etc. It is a known fact that once anything like that is built they manage to change the rules of how it can be filled. If the city is so concerned over tax revenue why didn't the city put in a gold course that was purposed instead of Spring Brook Nature Center? Now the people of Fridley are paying for the park to stay open. Also, how convenient that Demello chose to hold this meeting on a holiday weekend when most people have plans and will be out of town. His other meetings were received on the day of the meeting or the day after. It's beginning to look like Fridley will not be happy until the city is paved from one end to the other. There seems to be hidden interest for somebody other than the City of Fridley. I guess if it isn't near your property it doesn't matter what they stick in. City officials are elected into office to oversee what is best for the city and the citizens who reside there. I for one, along with others, don't thinks they're doing their job in our best interest. Sincerely, C� � . . �� Patricia Mulroy 1384 64th Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 : � � CRY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 13, 2005 Date: June 8, 2005 To: William Burns, City Manager�t1V From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Rachel Harris, Environmental Planner Subject: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment — Pertaining to Rezoning, ZOA #05-01, 7110 — 90 University Avenue NE M-05-41 INTRODUCTION Jerome O'Brian Slawick, Har Mar Inc. and owner of the property located at 7110-90 University Avenue NE, has requested a rezoning of his property from M-1, Light Industrial, to G2, General Business. State law requires that Council's mechanism for a rezoning approval is by approval of a rezoning ordinance. This ordinance authorizes a change in both the zoning map and the associated text. The Planning Commission held its public hearing on this item at its April 20, 2005, meeting. The Commission unanimously recommended approval. City Council held its public hearing for this item at their May 9, 2005, meeting. Council held its first reading of this ordinance on May 23, 2005, and unanimously voted in favor of the amendment. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council hold the second reading of the proposed attached ordinance approving rezoning request ZOA #05-01, to allow a change in zoning from M-1, Light Industrial to G2, General Business. 79 ORDINANCE NO. -2005 ORDINANCE APPROVING A REZONING ZOA #OS-Ol, FROM M-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO C-2, GENERAL BUSINESS, BY HAR-MAR INCORPORATED, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON LOTS 4-6, BLOCK 1, PACO INDUSTIAL PARK, EXCEPT THE NORTH 35 FEET OF LOT 4, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7110-90 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE, FRIDLEY ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA BY MAHING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS The Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Appendix D of the Fridley City Code is amended hereinafter as indicated. SECTION 2. LOTS 4-6, BLOCK 1, PACO 1NDUSTIAL PARK, EXCEPT THE NORTH 35 FEET OF LOT 4, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7110-90 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE, FRIDLEY Is hereby designated to be in the Zoned District C-2 (General Business District). SE CTION 3. That the Zoning Administrator is directed to change the official zoning map to show said tract or area to be rezoned from Zoned District M-1 (Light Industrial) to C-2 (General Business District). PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 13th DAY OF JUNE, 2005. SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK Public Hearing. May 9, 2005 First Reading: May 23, 2005 Second Reading: June 13,2005 Publication: June 23, 2005 � � CffY OF FRIaLEI' Date To: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 13, 2005 June 9, 2005 William Burns, City Manager From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Rachel Harris, Environmental Planner Subject: Elimination of Four Special Use Permits Related to Past M-1, Light Industrial Uses At 7110 — 90 University Avenue NE M-05-48 INTRODUCTION Jerome O'Brian Slawick, Har Mar Inc. and owner of the property located at 7110-90 University Avenue NE, has requested a rezoning of his property from M-1, Light Industrial, to C-2, General Business. If approved, the 4 special use permits from previous years will not be required and should be eliminated. The Planning Commission held its public hearing on this item at its April 20, 2005, meeting. The Commission unanimously recommended approval. City Council held its public hearing for this item at their May 9, 2005, meeting. Council held its first reading of this ordinance on May 23, 2005, and unanimously voted in favor of the amendment. The second reading is to be held on June 13, 2005. Once rezoned, the property will not be required to maintain the Special Use Permits that were granted under the M-I, Light Industrial zoning designation. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council hold the second reading of the proposed ordinance approving rezoning request ZOA #05-01, to allow a change in zoning from M-1, Light Industrial to C- 2, General Business. Once approved, staff recommends approving this attached resolution to officially eliminate the special use permits that pertained to the former zoning. RESOLUTION NO. -2005 RESOLUTION APPROVING A MINOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, CP #OS-Ol, BY HAR-MAR INCORPORATED, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON LOTS 4-6, BLOCK 1, PACO INDUSTIAL PARK, EXCEPT THE NORTH 35 FEET OF LOT 4, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7110-90 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE, FRIDLEY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the minor Comprehensive Plan Amendment , CP #OS-01, on Apri120, 2005 and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council also conducted a public review of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment as proposed at their May 9, 2005 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Land Planning Act (MN Statutes 473.851 - 473.872) requires that local government units prepare and submit minor amendments to the land use plans to the Metropolitan Council; and WHEREAS, a minor amendment is defined as changes to the future land use plan where the affected area is small or where the proposed future land use will result in minor changes in metropolitan service demand; changes in the urban service area involving less than 40 acres; change to plan goals and policies that do not change the overall thrust of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has determined this Comprehensive Plan change and associated rezoning of a single multi-tenant property to G2, General Business/Commercial to be a minor amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley hereby approves the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CP #OS-01. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 23rd DAY OF MAY, 2005. SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR ATTEST: DEBRA SKOGEN - CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. -2005 RESOLUTION ELIMINATING FOUR SPECIAL USE PERMITS FOR THE PROPERTY AT 7110 - 7190 UNIVERSITY AVENUE, LEGALLY DESCIBED AS, LOTS 4-6, BLOCK 1, PACO INDUSTRIAL PARK, EXCEPT THE NORTH 35 FEET OF LOT 4, ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Rezoning Request, ZOA #0-01, and Comprehensive Plan Amendment CP #OS-01, and recommended approval of both items; and WHEREAS, the City Council also conducted a public review of the Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment requests, at their May 9, 2005 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the City has determined this Rezoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendment is consistent with the direction that the City desires for this site, and WHEREAS, the rezoning to G2, General Business, from M-1, Light Industrial eliminates the need for past special use permits in the M-1 district, permits that would not be required in the G2 District, and WHEREAS, elimination of special use permits: SP #86-06, SP # 88-02, SP #97-09, and SP # 01-03, would create a clean file for purposes of properiy records, and WHEREAS, It is the City's desire to eliminate the four past Special Use Permits and thereby to make a clean record at the Anoka County Recorder's Office, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley hereby approves the elimination o£ SP #86-06, SP # 88-02, SP #97-09, and SP # 01-03. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 13th DAY OF JUNE, 2005. SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR ATTEST: DEBRA SKOGEN - CITY CLERK � � CffY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF June 13, 2005 To: William W. Burns, City Manager From: Richard Pribyl, Finance Director Debra Skogen, City Clerk Donald Abbot, Police Chief Date � June 6, 2005 Approval of Liquor License to Greg Asproth for Billiard Street Cafe Located at 7178 University Avenue NE A public hearing was held on May 9, 2005 regarding Greg Asproth's application to allow Billiard Street Cafe to have an intoxicating liquor license and late hour endorsement. This license is contingent upon the City Council approving a zoning text amendment from M-1 to C- 2 which would allot an intoxicating liquor license in that zoning district. The issue of minors in attendance has been raised with the applicant and he is aware it is his responsibility to monitor minors. In addition, the applicant is working with a consultant to increase their food sales by creating a new menu and by promoting and advertising their business more in the local paper and other areas. Staff recommends approval of the license if the zoning text amendment receives its second reading. � � CffY OF FRIaLEI' AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 Date: June 6, 2005 To: From Subject: William Burns, City Manager Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Preliminary Plat Request, PS #04-01, John DeMello, M-05-46 INTRODUCTION John DeMello of Family Lifestyle Housing Corporation, is requesting a plat to create a new parcel from 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant). A retail complex will occupy a potion of the ground floor and the remainder of the parcel will be used for the construction of 70-unit senior condominium complex. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the June 3, 2005, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for PS #05-02. After receiving public comment and a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of plat request, PS #05-02, with 23 stipulations as presented. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of the preliminary plat request. 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of June 13, 2005. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A-7 and A-8, titled Exterior Elevations, revised 5/19/05 and architectural plan A-3, titled Building Plan Ground Level, dated 4/29/05. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshal. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Demolition Permits Shall be obtained for removal of buildings at 1314 Mississippi at 1340 Mississippi Street, and 6421 Central Avenue, and buildings are to be removed prior to issuance of building permits for the new construction. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner to submit revised storm water management plans and calculations for approval by the City Engineering staff. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement must be filed prior to issuance of building perm its. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and Rice Creek Watershed District permits. 13. City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 14. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to the City Council public hearing regarding the rezoning on June 13, 2005. 15. Petitioner shall install a 7' high screening fence or planting screening along the east and south property lines, according to Section 205.14.6.G(1). 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,287.25 (142,924 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 23. The Petitioner shall provide walkway access around the site for pedestrian connections at the north, west, and south side of property. City of Fridley Land Use Application ZOA #05-02 & PS #05-02 May 25, 2005 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Family Lifestyle Development Corporation John DeMello 2872 17th Terrace N W New Brighton MN 55112 Requested Action: Rezone property from C-1, C-2, and R-1 to S-2. Reqlat Location: 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6441 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue Existing Zoning: 1314 Mississippi St. — C-2, General Business 1340 Mississippi St. — R-1, Single Family 6421 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business & R-1, Single Family 6441 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business & R-1 Single Family 6461 Central Avenue — C-2, General Business Size: Approximate size of entire area to be rezoned and replatted: 159,460 sq. ft. 3.66 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family homes, small commercial building (garage), and vacant land Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Commercial building & C-2 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Single Family homes & C-1 and R-1 W: Vacant land and Restaurant & S-2 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Future Land Use Map designates this area as Redevelopment. Zoning History: 1314 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1952 — House is built. 1959 — Detached garage built. 1340 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage constructed pre-1949. 6421 Central Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage built prior to 1949. SPECIAL INFORMATION 6461 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot 1941 — Lot is platted. 6441 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot. 1941 — Lot is platted. 1969 — Proposal to build a Tastee-Freez. 1998 — Rezoning request from C-1 to R-1, withdrawn prior to Planning Commission. Legal Description of Property: 1340 Mississippi Street: Lot 15, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1314 Mississippi Street: Lot 16, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6461 Central Avenue: Lot 17, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6441 Central Avenue: Lot 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6421 Central Avenue: Lot 19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition Council Action / 60 Day Date: City Council — June 13, 2005 60-Day Date — June 27, 2005 SUMMARY OF REQUEST The petitioner, John DeMello, of Family Lifestyle Development Corp., is requesting to replat and rezone the properties located at 1314 Mississippi St., 1340 Mississippi St., 6421 Central Ave., 6441 Central Ave., 6461 Central Ave. from C-1, Local Business, C-2 General Business, and R-1 Single Family to S-2 Redevelopment District for the purpose of redevelopment, to allow for a Senior Housing Development/Retail mixed-use development. SU M MARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this plat, rezoning and subsequent master plan request. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. • Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. • Provides additional job opportunities. Staff Report Prepared by: Julie Jones ZOA#05-02 & PS#05-02 Spring Valley Estates Overview Summary of Applications John DeMello of Family Lifestyle Development Corporation is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to construct a mixed use retail/senior housing complex on the southeast corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The two actions that have been requested are a Plat and a Rezoning. Both of these applications, and the master plan approval, will be examined individually in this report. A Plat has been requested to create one new parcel, combining existing lots located at 1340 and 1314 Mississippi Street, and 6461, 6441 (vacant), and 6421 Central Avenue. A 10,492 square foot retail complex will occupy the lower level of the northeastern corner of the building with 70 condominium units occupying the remainder of the building. The petitioner is also requesting a rezoning for the newly created parcel. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings. The petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. ��1��[�� ,� � .,��' � i�� ' � � �' � � �� x � ' � � .: _` ' , �� x� ' �� : ' � : ` �; � � � *,�� m� ��: Proposed Project The petitioner is proposing to construct a 3-story complex, which incorporates a 10,492 square foot retail area on the lower level of the northwestern corner of the development. The petitioner has stated that he envisions that this complex will house neighborhood retail businesses, which could include businesses like a pharmacy, a coffee shop, an ice cream/sandwich shop or a hair salon. The retail complex will include 45 - 9 foot wide parking stalls for customers. The housing portion of the complex will have 70 condominium units for seniors. The proposed 70 units will be owner-occupied and comprised of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units. There are a variety of unit styles and sizes with some including a den. The residential development will include 110 underground parking stalls and 12 surface parking stalls. The petitioner plans to model the exterior of both projects after an Italian villa. The site will include a storm water pond with landscaping that surrounds the property. Site History The proposed development area is located on the southeast corner of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue. The area consists of 2 vacant lots, which are located on Central Avenue and 4 homes that were constructed prior to 1952, 2 of which are located on Mississippi Street and the other 2 are located on Central Avenue. The petitioners' father, Frank DeMello purchased the vacant parcel located 6461 Central Avenue, 25 years ago. When the property at 1314 Mississippi Street came up for sale over the summer of 2003, the petitioner purchased it with the hope of developing the land. The petitioner then contacted surrounding property owners to see if they would be interested in selling their properties. When the neighboring property owners became interested in selling their properties, the petitioner came forward with a redevelopment proposal in the spring of 2004. The previous plat and rezoning applications were denied. The 2004 proposal included the creation of two separate parcels and included three additional lots down to 64th Avenue with the retail portion of the development being a separate building and parcel. The housing portion of the proposal was to build a 90-unit, four-story, senior condominium complex. The retail portion of the development included plans for 13,750 sq. ft. of commercial retail space. The City Council denied this proposal, citing that the density was too high, creating potential traffic problems with traffic existing onto 64th Avenue, limiting landscaping opportunities, and limiting the possibility of adequate snow storage areas. Analysis Rezoning Application ZOA #OS-02 The petitioner is requesting a rezoning and master plan approval for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street south to and including 6421 Old Central Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. The properties requesting to be rezoned are 1340 Mississippi Street (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family), 1314 Mississippi Street (single family home and garage (welding shop), zoned C-2, General Business), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant lot, zoned C-2, General Business), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant lot, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family), and 6421 Central Avenue (single family home, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family). The petitioner is proposing to redevelop these five parcels. Zoning Map — Shows mix of zoning and properties to be replatted and rezoned. As the properties exist today, 6441 and 6421 Central Avenue have split zoning between C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family. While both of the lots are rather large in size, conflicts arise when the zoning is split between a commercial and residential zoning at an arbitrary point in the lot. Rezoning a property to S-2 Redevelopment District, requires that the accompanying site plan become the master plan for the site. If the rezoning and master plan were approved by the City 2 Council any modification of the site plan would need to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Review of the master plan also needs to be completed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority as the property is in a Redevelopment District. Comprehensive Plan — Future Land Use and Housing Chapters The City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. State Statute gives the City the authority to "rezone" property from one designated use to another, so long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000 and is a"tool intended to help guide future growth and development of the community...lt is a plan because it contains goa/s, policies and strategies that all work together, looking to the future and working towards achieving a community wide vision". In order for a rezoning to be viewed favorably, it must be in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed retail complex, senior owner-occupied condominium complex and rezoning of the properties meet several of the objectives the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the Comprehensive Plan. The area of Old Central between Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road was identified as an area for future redevelopment. The purpose of redevelopment is to provide the opportunity for more efficient land uses and eliminate inefficient land uses and under utilized parcels. Redevelopment can a/so provide an opportunity to build new facilities, meet current market demands and desires of the City, creates new tax base, and creates additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the rezoning of these properties. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states that for this portion of Old Central, "consideration should be made to replacing the current mix of single-family residential and commercial uses with higher density residential development that together with the health club may serve as an attractive residential location for move-up housing". The Comprehensive Plan also states that for projects in these redevelopment areas requiring rezoning that the S-2 zoning designation "would be the appropriate Zoning district to implement for the redevelopment project. The intent of the district is to provide the City with site plan review authority to determine if the proposed project meets the goa/s and objectives of the City's Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plans". The Comprehensive Plan, in both the Future Land Use & the Housing chapters, addresses the desire for a variety of housing types in a number of goals listed below. • Ensure that adequate opportunities exist for the development of a variety of housing types at a range of affordability levels including low, low-moderate and high cost housing to meet the life-cycle needs of Fridley residents. • Create sustainable, self-reliant, mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhoods that contribute positively to the quality of life and image of Fridley. • Ensure a variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life cycle. • Strengthen neighborhoods and improve upon the quality of the City's housing stock. • Diversify the housing supply to include move up housing both in the form of rental and owner occupied housing. As Fridley's residents continue to age, demand will increase for "empty nester" and senior housing. There will be an increased demand for senior rental, senior owned condominium/town homes, and assisted living facilities. The proposed project, 70 senior owner-occupied condominium units, will meet some of the current demand for those seniors seeking alternatives to their current housing type. Rezoning these properties helps to achieve the Comprehensive Plan's goal for this area. � Housing Market Study The petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc. in 2003 to complete a Market Feasibility Study for Senior Housing in Fridley. The demographic and competitive market analysis done by Maxfield was updated in March 2004, and, again in March 2005. The latest updated remarks from Maxfield indicates that there continues to be a demand in the Fridley area for senior condominium housing units. Maxfield's research is taking into account the planned Town Center project across Central Avenue, which is yet to begin construction. The original, base housing market study pointed out that given the competitive situation in the marketplace, the quality of the subject site, and the lack of for-sale product within three miles of the property, the senior condominium project would be the most marketable product for the site. Their research also showed that the subject site could best support an age-restricted owner- occupied development such as a condominium or cooperative of around 70 units. Maxfield's updated figures indicate suggested sale prices to be $156,000 for the smallest one- bedroom unit to $279,000 for the largest three-bedroom unit. They expect the entire housing portion of the project to sell out in 22 months. Plat Application #OS-02 John DeMello, Family Lifestyle Development Corporation, is seeking to replat the properties located at 1340 Mississippi Street, 1314 Mississippi Street, 6461 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, and 6421 Central Avenue to create one new consolidated lot. The proposed plat will consist of one lot; Lot 1, Block 1, Spring Valley Estates. This is different than the 2004 proposal which created two new lots, one accommodating the retail portion of the development and one containing the housing portion of the project. Looking south on Old Central toward project area Rezoning a property to S-2, Redevelopment District allows for the maximum flexibility for a redevelopment project. The petitioner has designed their project to meet the zoning classification codes most similar to their intended use. This would be C-2, General Business, zoning for the retail portion of the project and R-3, General Multiple Unit Housing, for the residential portion of the project. The retail portion of the proposed development is 10,492 square feet and meets all the parking requirements for the number of parking stalls required for a retail use under the speculative parking ratio requirements. Proof of parking for an additional 8 parking stalls is also provided. Staff is satisfied with this amount of parking for the commercial part of the development. � The housing portion of the project is 120,196 square feet in size with all three floors combined. This is a density of 21 units per acre. The petitioner is proposing to construct 70 senior owner- occupied condominium units. The development will include 110 underground parking stalls and 12 surface parking stalls. This amount of parking meets the requirement for an independent living facility. However, staff considers this project to fall somewhere in between the category of senior assisted living and market rate housing parking requirements. Market rate parking requirements would be for a total of 129 parking spaces. The petitioner is proposing at total of 122 parking stalls, which is 7 units shy of the market rate requirements. Staff believes the amount of stalls provided should be adequate since some households occupying this complex would be expected to have only one vehicle. Staff finds the lot coverage proposed to be reasonable for a mixed use development. Code requires no more than 30% lot coverage for multi-unit residential and commercial properties. The proposed project shows 28% lot coverage, meeting requirements for both zoning types. Early discussions with Anoka County indicated that additional right-of-way on Central Avenue and Mississippi Street will be required for future reconstruction purposes. They anticipate that a 120 ft. right-of-way corridor will be required for both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersections in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. The County assumes when the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection is reconstructed, it would be centered in the 120 ft. right-of-way corridor. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and 10 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. Therefore, staff assumes that the County will be requesting that at this time, both of the right-of-ways be dedicated. The petitioner has drawn the site plan to illustrate right-of-way acquisition along both County Roads. Due to necessity of right-of-way acquisition, the drive lane on the west side of the development will be only two feet from the west property line. The parking setback on the north side of the development, which is considered the front yard of this site layout, meets the minimum 35' setback. The building is 34' in height to the mid-span of the roof line. Therefore, the building only requires a 15' side yard setback on the east side, but an 18' setback is provided. The additional 3' of side yard setback was provided on the east side of the project, because fire truck access may be required. The 18' setback, combined with an 8' public right of way that runs along the east property line, would provide 26' of clearance for the possibly required fire truck access. The rear yard setback of 40' on the south side has also been met. As stated above, due to the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setbacks can be recognized under this rezoning master plan approval. The proposal as submitted does not meet the landscaping requirements of City Code, however. According to code, 160 trees will be required for this development. The petitioner is proposing to provide 91 trees. Code also requires at minimum that 30% of the trees be coniferous. This would be 48 of the 160 trees required. The petitioner has met this requirement in the proposal by providing 49 conifers. The petitioner is proposing to add rain garden plantings to the ponding areas in lieu of some of the tree landscaping requirement. Staff would like to encourage the rain garden plantings, but would like to see more trees planted on the property as well. There currently is very little landscaping proposed on the south end of the plat. There are also possibilities to save some of the existing trees that could reduce the 160 tree requirement. Traffc Study Staff utilized a number of sources to determine the possible impacts that 70 senior owner occupied condominium units and the commercial complex may have on the local traffic patterns. Staff consulted the Transportation chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and reviewed the traffic study supplied by TDI, Traffic Date Incorporated. � Comprehensive Plan — Transportation Chapter The City's Comprehensive Plan indicated that in 2001, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed senior condominiums carried 8,000 vehicles per day and, at this traffic level, was only carrying 57% of the traffic for which the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates Old Central carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2020, based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles / day, Old Central will be carrying 71 % if the maximum amount of traffic for which the roadway was designed. Review of Traffc Impact Report Prepared by TDI, Inc. Family Lifestyle Development Corporation hired TDI, Traffic Data Incorporated, a Data Collection, Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning firm to perform a traffic analysis in 2004. The analysis was regarding the proposal for more housing units and more retail space than the current proposal. The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, which was published in December 2003. At that time, the consultants used the SeniorAdult Housing Attached category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed senior complex would generate a total of 247 trips per day. The consultants used the Specialty Retail Center category from the ITE manual and determined that the proposed retail complex would generate a total of 598 trips per day. Trip Generation ITE Description Land Use 252 814 Senior Adult Housing — Attached (71 units) Specialty Retail Center — (13,500 sq. ft.) Daily Trips AM Peak Hour In Out 247 3 3 598 n/a n/a PM Peak Hour In Out 5 3 16 21 TDI developed traffic forecasts for the following 2005 scenarios: ➢ No Build (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Senior Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) ➢ Build Spring Valley Estates (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Senior Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) The finding of these forecasts show that the level of service at both the Central Avenue/64tn Avenue intersections and the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersections would remain the same in the no-build or build scenarios. The only change seen is during the AM Peak Hour at the Central Avenue/64th Avenue eastbound intersection, where the level of service would change from LOS B to LOS C. Central Avenue/64T" Avenue Westbound & Eastbound Approach LOS Results AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Westbound Eastbound Westbound Eastbound 2005 No-Build A B C C 2005 Build A C C C Mississi i Street/Central Avenue Intersection LOS Results Scenario AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 2005 No-Build 2005 Build C C D D L•� To complete the traffic study, the consultants also referred to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which governs the use of traffic control devices per Minnesota State Statute. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has eight criteria (called warrants) to consider when determining if a traffic signal should be installed at an intersection or not. These warrants are primarily based on the traffic volumes flowing through the intersection. A warrant analysis was conducted for the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. To complete this analysis, TDI staff performed a turning movement count from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. None of the eight warrants are met under the existing conditions, nor will they be met if the senior housing and retail buildings are constructed on the proposed site. According to this analysis, a traffic signal should not be installed at the intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue until at least one of the warrants is being met. The conclusions of TDI's analysis state that the stop controlled approaches at the Central Avenue/64th Avenue intersection operate at LOS C or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic control. The intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue will operate at LOS D or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic controls. A traffic signal was not currently warranted at the intersection and a traffic signal was not be warranted at the intersection after the previously proposed development would have been completed, according to the 2004 traffic study. The traffic study consultant was asked to submit comments regarding the traffic impacts of the current redevelopment proposal for less retail space and housing units. Their comments were summed up by the following statement: "As long as the proposed number of units and amount of retail space remains below the amount 1 initially studied, the roadway network will accommodate the seniorhousing development."A complete copy of the 2004 traffic study is available upon request. Wetland/Drainage The petitioner is still working with the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) to finalize an agreement regarding the necessary permits needed for the project. The wetland that was of concern in last year's proposal has been exempted by the RCWD, so no replacement or mitigation is required. Revised storm water management plans are expected to resolve concerns that the City Engineering Department had over the initial set of plans submitted with the application. Comments Received During the public hearings for this development proposed last year, there was a great deal of Public input. Some of the concerns raised were regarding traffic and a guarantee that the tenants of the complex would be 55 or older. To alleviate those concerns ahead of time, the petitioner provided city staff with a traffic study and a copy of the proposed association documents upon submittal of the rezoning and plat request. Much of the concern, however, revolved around traffic onto 64th Avenue. The current development proposal no longer includes the properties along 64th Avenue and will not have access onto 64th Avenue. The petitioner held a neighborhood meeting on April 27 and is holding a second neighborhood informational meeting on May 27. Staff was not in attendance at either of these meetings. However, we have heard that concerns raised have mostly been about crime or traffic. Staff has received only a couple of calls to date in response to the public hearing notice, inquiring about the property. These callers were seeking information about the project, but did not exhibit any objections. Staff has also received a call from someone interested in buying a condominium unit. 7 Staff Recommendation City Staff recommends approval of this Rezoning ZOA #05-02 and accompanying site plan for the senior building and retail complex, with stipulations. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provides housing opportunities for seniors. • Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. • Provides additional job opportunities in Fridley City Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for PS#05-02, with stipulations. Stipulations Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of the above land use requests: 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan as shown on the site plan dated 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A7 and A8, titled Exterior Elevations, revised 5/19/05 and architectural plan A3, titled Building Plan Ground Level, dated 4/29/05. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the applicable fire code requirements in the International Fire Code. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Demolition permits shall be obtained for removal of the buildings at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street and 6421 Central. 7. Petitioner to provide revised Certificate of Exemption for wetland and to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner to submit revised storm water management plans and calculations for approval by the City Engineering staff. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain required NPDES Permit and Rice Creek Watershed District permits. 13. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 14. Final Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to the City Council public hearing regarding the rezoning on June 13, 2005. 15. Petitioner shall install a 7' high screening fence or planting screening along the east and south property lines, according to Section 205.14.6.G(1) of the Fridley Zoning Code. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,287.25 (142,924 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. : 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 23. The Petitioner shall provide walkway access around the site for pedestrian connections at the north, west, and south sides of property. � June 1, 2005 1372 64'� Ave. N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Planning Commission City of Fridley Planning Comxnission Members, We aze unable to attend tonight's meeting due to the concurrently scheduled Fridley High School gradua.tion ceremony. We wish to convey our adamant opposition to the la.test DeMello apartment building proposal and request for rezoning. DeMello's new proposal is in essence very similar to DeMello's ProfitM� proposal that the City Council overwhelmi.ngly denied last yeaz. It was widely expressed last year that this loca.tion was NOT an appropria.te place for an apartment building to be located, and nothing has changed. Tha.nk you for your f'`�� ' �� / �� ,�; lVlark Schwartz Jea.n Schwartz •� May 26, 2005 Scott Lund, Mayor City of Fridley 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Dear Mr. Mayor, I am opposed to the plan to rezone five pazcels into one for the sole purpose of high density housing. Why doesn't it seem to matter what the citizens of Fridley really want? Our property is valuable to us and who would want to buy any of the houses that are in view of the project that is on the agenda. This is nothing more than greed for the developer and the City of Fridley. Not aIl peopie who retire can afford to live in the units that are proposed. Does that mean we are to be penalized not once, but twice, because the value of our home will depreciate. • When the units are completed and are not rented out, what are your plans for filling the units? I've seen it happen many times when the units aren't being rented they take alternate routes such as Section 8, etc. It is a known fact that once anything like that is built they manage to change the rules of how it can be filled. If the city is so concerned over tax revenue why didn't the city put in a gold course that was purposed instead of Spring Brook Nature Center? Now the people of Fridley are paying for the park to stay open. Also, how convenient that Demello chose to hold this meeting on a holiday weekend when most people ha�e plans and will be out of town. His other meetings were received on the day of the meeting or the day after. It's beginning to look like Fridley will not be happy until the city is paved from one end to the oiher. There seems to be hidden interest for sornebody other than the City of Fridley. I guess if it isn't near your property it doesn't matter what they stick in. City officials are elected into office to oversee what is best for the city and the citizens who reside there. I for one, along with others, don't thinks they're doing their job in our best interest. Sincerely, � � . �� Patricia Mulroy 1384 64`� Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 97 � � CffY OF FRIaLEI' Date To: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 13, 2005 June 8, 2005 William Burns, City Manager From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator Rachel Harris, Environmental Planner Subject: Plat Approval — Pertaining to Plat Request PS #05-03, 1475 and 1485 — 73rd Avenue N. E. M-05-45 INTRODUCTION Tim Van Auken, 1475 73rd Avenue N. E owns both 1475 and 1485 &3rd Avenue and has requested a re-plat of his property to allow a total of 6 lots, 2 to allow the existing homes to remain along 73rd and the remaining 4 lots would to allow two sets of two twin homes, or a total of 4 twin homes that would face a 73'/ extension. The current zoning on this property is R-3, Multiple Family Residential. Right of way currently exists adjacent to the site and the developer has proposed dedication of additional right of way to allow ease of access to the 4 proposed new homes. ISSUES Ideally, a plat such as the proposed plat would be on a through street or a cul-de-sac. This right-of-way is unique. The die was cut years ago when the right- of- way was extended past the cul-de-sac and the then end of 73'/ Way. A curb, gutter and half of a street were installed. The surrounding land owners at that time were not interested in subdividing their properties and as a result the City allowed a half street to extend past a cul-de-sac. The property owner at 1479 73'/ Avenue and the owner at 1476 Onondaga will keep an "open mind" about the prospects of a cul-de-sac. When the project initially came forward, that information was not known. Later, Ms Marijane Hanson (1476 Onondaga) sent in a letter indicating that she would allow an easement to be dedicated for the portion of a 30' dead-end street. This would allow access to her property, as well as, allow the Van Auken Plat to move forward as proposed. On the morning of June 3, 2005 (morning of the Planning Commission), Jon V. Jackels, stopped in to discuss his willingness to further evaluate a cul-de-sac. Though assessments may be a factor, Mr. Jackels believes the best alternative is a cul-de-sac. He has a large tree on his property that he would like to preserve. As a result he has suggested a 30' radius, rather than a 40' radius cul-de-sac. Staff is analyzing both design and cost at this time. Due to the lateness of this suggested street alternative, staff recommends approval of the plat with the dead-end design. Staff will continue to work with property owners and if a cul- de-sac will work, the language will be built into the development agreement. Council can then consider that alternative and approve or reject it, before the final plat is approve and filed. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission held its public hearing on this item at its June 3, 2005, meeting. The Commission unanimously recommended approval. City Council is scheduled to see this item on their agenda at the June 13, 2005 , meeting. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of PS #05-03 with the following stipulations: City Staff recommend that the following stipulations be placed upon approval of this request: 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Any remaining debris from demolition of existing home and any brush piles on site shall be removed prior to granting of final plat. 3. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties. 4. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner to pay required park dedication fees of $3,000 prior to issuance of building perm its. 7. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees, including sanitary sewer extension. 8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 9. Twin homes shall meet all parking requirements. 10. Add appropriate address and marking requirements per Fire Code. 11. The petitioner shall agree to the terms of a development agreement that shall be prepared by City staff and approved by the City Council simultaneous with their final plat approval. - Preliminary Plat #05-03 Timothy VanAuken 1475,1485 73rd Ave NE The petitioner proposes to subdivide two large lots into four or six lots and build two twin homes on the northern lots on the property, leaving the existing single family residences on the southern lots. To provide access, he proposes to extend the dead-end street, and widen it from 17 feet to 30 feet. We, as neighbors who will be directly impacted by the proposal, have specific concerns which we have addressed to staff and the Planning Commission. Our concerns have not been adequately addressed to date. First request to the CounciL• Resolve the conflict between the current zoning for the property and the desired usage shown in the 2001 Comprehensive Plan. • The present zoning for the property is R-3, Multi-family Residential. • The existing use of the property, as shown in the 2001 Comprehensive Plan, and historically since initial construction in 1951, is single family residential. • The 2020 Future Land Use for the parcel, as shown in the 2001 Comprehensive Plan, is Single Family ResidentiaL • The same plan also cites the need to identify additional parcels for single family residential construction, and for move-up housing. • In their report to the Planning Commission, staff stated, "R3 zoning is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan." • The west cul-de-sac on 73 %2 Avenue NE, where the proposed lots will face, is zoned Rl and,contains eight single family residences, each on lots of at least 10,000 square feet. • The proposed plat specifies twin homes, or single family attached homes, to be placed on lots of just over 5000 square feet each. • At the�ublic hearing before the Planning Commission on June l, 2005, staff stated in their report that the proposal was to create "two new buildable lots on the northern portion of the property", and that the lots "meet the minimum lot width of 75 feet" and the "minimum lot size of 10, 000 square feet. " We believe this was deliberately misleading to the commission and the audience since the proposed lots are in fact 41.25 feet wide and between 5100 and 5300 square feet each in area. • At the public hearing on June 1, 2005, the Planning Commission instructed staff to request that the Council review the R3 zoning. This statement was not included in the staff report to the City Manager, where it was simply noted that the Comxnission's vote was unanimous. • Staff points to the multi-unit apartment building on the property to the west of the subject parcel in an effort to support the multi-family zoning, but this property is completely fenced off from access to 73 '/Z Avenue, and has its access solely via 73'� Avenue. The occupants and traffic have virtually no impact on the properties on 73 %x Avenue. We request that the Council take action as necessary to bring the zoning into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, designating the lots as Rl Single Family Residential. This will meet a second goal of the pdan, to provide lots for single family residential construction, and preserve the character of the neighborhood as it presently exists. I:'re�s�ced by Sue S.herek (7Ci3-784-Ci��) atzd ,toi� Jaekel; (7ti;_7SU-8413} Junc 12, 2{}OS Second request to the Council Direct staff and the developer to develop their plan to place a cul-de-sac at the end of the extended city street, instead of the dead end as currently proposed. • Staff analysis indicates that a cul-de-sac cannot be constructed and still leave buildable lots for the petitioner, yet the drawing presented to the Planning Commission had one drawn in. In addition, since the petitioner ovcros the property to the south of the proposed pazcels, he has the option of altering the plat lines in such a way as to create more equal north-south division of the property, thereby permitting development of the property including addition of a proper cul-de-sac. We've brought one example of a cul-de-sac which provides for an area of 10,000 square feet and 75 foot lot width for both lots. This could even more easily be done for a single family lot, which requires minimuxn azea of 9,000 square feet. • The zoning code, at 211.07.12, provides for dead-end or cul-de-sac streets to have "a turn around at the closed end having property line and curb-line diameters of not less than 100 feet and 80 feet respectively". It is the responsibility of city staff to try to make this use conform to the ordinance. • Staff stated at the Planning Commission meeting that a precedent was set as a 125 foot long, seventeen foot wide "half street" was constructed when a single lot to the north was subdivided in 1986. No one determixied the history behind that action. That unusual extension occurred in anticipation of further subdivision by other property owners along 73`a Avenue to the south andlor Onondaga Street to the north. The intent was that the road would eventually end at the last property developed or go all the way through to intersect with Hayes Street. The original curbing on the existing cul-de-sac was done with bituminous in anticipation of future development. Previous development west of Mr. Va�uken's property prevents the through street option, but a proper cul-de-sae is still possible. • Mexx�bers of the Planning Commission, in discussing the proposal, stated they "could not vote.for this proposal with the dead-end option". In voting to send the matter forwazd to the City Council, they added that "we strongly urge staff to work out a cul-de-sac option". This detail was not included in the staff recommendation to the City Manager in preparation for the council meeting. • Staff stated they "plan to have suggestions resolveci by the time this reaches council," but no such plan has been shared by staff with the neighbors who called to address the issue with staff after the meeting. If a development proposal goes forward for this properry, we request that the Council direct staff to work with the petitioner to develop a working cul-de-sac proposal. We oppose extension or expansion of the existing dead-end street, which will become more problematic with the addition of several additional driveways having access. �'repared by �ue Sherek (7ti3-78�-6�) an.d Jo�t Jackels (7ti3-78(3-8�i3) June 12, ZUO� �a —� j —� —� Cfl OD �I � CT A W N � � � o . C�. ��_��I�. I� I_� 1�� I. I�, 1� � I, .� 1 c..� C. � � , � � � � � � � � � 1 � � � � �� ,` �� 1 N�, J �. `�, . � �. I ( ' r + � \V ul +� p d` `�r � ` v) � \ � � � 1 5 � �' .� Q Q � � � % ` � a a � � � � y � � P � J h l� ) � u � i � � � � � rF _ .tD i _ v J a;, �D J P 1 "l3 o c� �� o � � Q- � � ^. u� rn� �� r+ � ? � Q (D (D 7 O � � O O(�p �� _` � � o � � � �' �: -o � � N �� a� C � � cD fD .�,. � (�p n � T �� O 'G -� � �� Q �� (D n � n �' O � � N� � � Q� � � N ' �. c� -�n � N � Tti �3� -� � � 0 3. �� o o � a��D . a��?� r+ o m v rn� —" c"n v � .A.N�, � � O W '� �- n? � � � � < < . � � .�r � � � C � � (l1 � X Z 1 � � 0 �i �. � � 3 � � � cQ � � o O v N ? � W o � �'. �� .� � _� � � � � Q rt �• � � � .p � ��..c,'cn � n � W O _ � n W � � � � � (p 3 < A, � � j � N "' � fD � � � 3 �� . 7 Q (Q � Q i � � � � � � � � �' "� � V� O � .� 'a t/� � W � �p a O � N �Q'Q �D N� � � C (D � �� Z w�� m �o 0 �� .:r m 3 �o� S11 � '� �o� . �G� � `G � � � � U7 � � .i � � (p OD �I � CT� A W N �a W N O '� a S ♦ 'G �. 3 W Q � W (i.� w v i � d, � � � � C � � � � � � � a �, - • � � V,, � �. � �� °� c�D � � �' y � � � � � • � �- rn m m � N S � � � `� < ( u`� �� ti, o �' � t � � t d � +�.i N G `� � � � � � � N � � � � � �� 1 � � (�. N O �- � z � '��D � � v � � � � �D � � � � (D (D "� � � � � n = O � Q 7 � N .V�-r fl� � �. ^�'� (� � g rt � � t�D (�D � o° cn � � O (�p � (7 'a `G � o � � � �' Q � � � (D C (�p C n m c � � �� a� C � � � m � � � 3; c� � �� ,• a o� � n �� tD n � n 3 0 m �' �. c'cu � r.. n � �� cQ °, � � i N � � � (D 0 p � � (D N i11 � � O O � � � � D _ � _ � '�' O (D � � � � � N � � �P - � rt N v �' O w 'C O � D O 3 � � � 3 � � I � X m � � � O � °c � � � o. � � � v o cr � � � 3 0 �, �, ,-. 'v wo � ,.�.� \ � y � (D � �� N � � � o' � ,� "G � � .� N -i~� o w m °- W v� � � Q o w � Q- D � �. c3u � y � o��D � � �'�.� � n � o �' � � �� u� O ,Q �1 -G Ul C W � � O �'' � (D � Q- v � �� o m � ��-a Z w�.� I'n ?� p o � �" N� � N N '� ��+0 � o �. � �o � � cs �I A W N O (O W �l 6f Ut .A W N „�� a 1...' . � R � � �' `� � � 1 � � � a� � s � � � � � G � ~ � � � �, � J � �� N '�t � � `/ � � � � �� ? � r� � .�.. \ �, 3 � C. Z � � � � N �. Q� � ,. � -t'a � � � � r 1 , �v - t � � � �` 1 �� ` � s � � N' 1 � ' �� j 1 S N �, � v � � � � � � � �� o m -a - c� � �3 � � �_ O � 7 Q- N � .fn.r f/� � �. � Q �: � � m m � °o �' �o o m '� n � � � O <' a m � "D �G � (D C� .�r � C n (D C v '� �� .� C � � � N rt �' � .� � � �,� �: o� � n �� O �' c c� � rn " � � � o � � �� m ,�- N � a,� � m � N � �� , � . � �p � m -� � � o � � � m _c�n v nCi � o'�� '' � D � � rt 0 N � � � � O N y � � N � ''"' ��.W � � o Q � o � D o 3 � � � �� ; X m � O'—": O =�, � � � 3 a�N � a o � � � � � o � N � � y O � � GJ (p '''' � � � -P. � (D � � � •� � 7� � �D � =� �- r+ o• � , � � � .� � � v � O w m a w �' C) � a w � Q- D � � �� o��D � �3a� 3 �• a�. � �. c� � � � o �' � �P � c� c�n v�i ? � '� I v, o � .� � N c w � o � D m c Q < � � n� � �n' o � � �� Z w�a„ m � o °, � N ? ��N -� �,°�a � O � ��o City of Fridley Land Use Application PS-05-03 GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Timothy Van Auken 1475 73rd Ave NE Fridley, MN 55432 Requested Action: Replat of two multiple unit residential lots to accommodate two twin homes. Existing Zoning: R-3 Multi-Family Residential Location: 1475 73rd Ave NE and 1485 73rd Ave NE Size: 20,821 square feet .50 acres Existing Land Use: 1475 73rd Ave NE -- Single Family 1485 73rd Ave NE — Single Family Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: R-1 Single Family E: R-1 Single Family S: 73rd Ave NE and Heavy Industrial W: R-3 Multible Unit Residential Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Use of property is consistent with Plan. Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Multiple dwelling complexes, including rental and condominium apartments, are a permitted use in R-3 zoning districts. Zoning History for 1475 73rd Ave NE: • 1951 - 1475 73rd Ave NE is platted. 1951 — Building permit issued for home. 1955 —Building permit issued for garage, but garage was not built. • 1971 —Building permit for garage. Zoning History for 1485 73rd Ave NE: • 1951 - 1485 73rd Ave NE is platted. • 1951 —Building permit issued for home. • 1955 —Building permit issued for garage/vestibule Legal Description of Property: Lot 27/29, Aud. Sub. #129 Public Utilities: Located near property. Sanitary sewer extension is necessary. Transportation: M ay 26, 2005 SPECIAL INFORMATION Twin homes will be accessed by 73 '/2 Ave. Physical Characteristics: Relatively flat, grass covered lot with mature trees and some shrubs. SUMMARY OF REQUEST Timothy Van Auken, petitioner, seeks to replat and subdivide the properties located at 1475 73rd Ave NE and 1485 73rd Ave NE for the purpose of building two (2) twin homes� SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this plat request, with stipulations: • Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. • Any remaining debris from demolition of existing home and any br�ush piles on site shall be removed prior to granting offinal plat. • Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staffprior to the issuance ofany building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties. • Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. • During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. • Petitioner to pay required park fees of $3, 000 ($750 x 4) prior to issuance of building permits. • Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees, including sanitary sewer extension. • The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by City staffprior to issuance of building permi ts. • Twin-homes shall meet all parking requirements. • Add appropriate address and marking requirements per Fire Code • The petitioner shall agree to the terms of a development agreement that shall be prepared by City staff and approved by the City Council simultaneous with their final plat approval. Staff Report Prepared by: Rachel Harris PS #05-03 Proiect Summarv Timothy Van Auken, petitioner, seeks to replat and subdivide the properties located at 1475 73ra Ave NE and 1485 73rd Ave NE. to allow the creation of two new multi-unit lots. Petitioner plans to build two new twin homes on each of the newly created parcels. The existing property contains a residential, single family home on the southern end of each lot with the northern ends undeveloped. Mr. Van Auken proposes to build the new homes on the northern portion of the lots at 1475 and 1485 73rd Avenue. The current zoning is R-3. The petitioner proposes no changes to the current zoning. �e , �' � {F1 e � 4� � Pmi � .. .. .. .., .., .. ��i`}�5�: � .. ..,.... Zoning map of area surrounding proposed plat Analysis Per zoning code Section 205.09.3 B(3) for R-3: •"Lot requirements of this Section are for three (3) or more dwelling units. Two-family dwellings in this district shall be subject to the R-2 District regulations and one-family dwellings shall be subject to the R-1 District regulations." Fridley requires that lots in the R-2 district be a minimum of 75' in width with a minimum total lot area of 10,000 square feet. The proposed Lots #1 & 2 will be 82.5' in width and 10,461 square feet in size after the replat. • The proposed Lots #3 & 4 will be 82.5' in width and 10,360 square feet in size after the replat. The minimum lot area requirement of 10,000 square feet for a two-family dwelling unit has been met on the proposed plat. Ariel map of the area surrounding the proposed plat The newly created home sites would obtain access off of 73 '/z Avenue. A minimum of 25' in street frontage is provided for access. The petitioner has obtained written agreement (enclosed) from the property owner at 1476 Onondaga Street to provide an easement to the City for roadway access across her property. This will allow access to both the proposed lots and will allow access to 1476 Onondaga, if the owner chooses to subdivide her property in the future. The proposed new twin homes meet all of the necessary setback requirements. The amount of lot coverage for the building footprint shown is 25%. Up to 30% would be permitted. All necessary utility and drainage easements are also provided for on the plat. As subdivided in the proposal only a twin home would be permitted on each of the four lots, since the lot is too small to stand independently for other R-3 uses. Staff Recommendation City Staff recommends approval of this plat request, with stipulations. • Does provide additional homeownership opportunities for Fridley residents. Stipulations City Staff recommend that the following stipulations be placed upon approval of this request: 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Any remaining debris from demolition of existing home and any brush piles on site shall be removed prior to gr�anting of final plat. 3. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City 's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties. 4. The petitioner shall provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. S. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner to pay required park dedication fees of $3, 000 prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees, including sanitary sewer extension. 8. The petitioner shall agr�ee to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 9. Twin homes shall meet all parking requirements. 10. Add appropriate address and marking requirements per Fire Code. 11. The petitioner shall agr�ee to the terms of a development agr�eement that shall be prepared by City staff and approved by the City Council simultaneous with their final plat approval. � From: Timothy J. Van Auken 1475 73rd Ave. NE Fridley, MN 55432 To: Marijane Hanson 1476 Onondaga St. NE Fridley, MN 55432 This agreement is subject to the approval of the preliminary plat by the City of Fridley's City CounciL The undersigned, Marij ane Hanson, single, hereby agrees to give an easement to the City of Fridley for roadway, drainage and utility purposes over, under and across: The South 25.00 feet of the East 55.00 feet of Lot 26, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 129, Anoka County, Minnesota, As shown on attached Certificate of Survey. �., � I ir, _� , .� _-: � � , , � . � . � �. / 104 � � (7T1f OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF June 13, 2005 To: William W. Burns, City Manager�`�� From: Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk Date: June 8, 2005 Re: First Reading of an Ordinance Proposing to Amend the City Charter and Providing for a Special Election Based on the CounciUCommission Survey Questions and the follow up conference meetings the City Council held with many of the Commission members, a majority felt the City should limit the losses occurring in the utility funds due to the limita.tion in the City Charter and put the question of removing water, sanitary and storm sewer rates once again before the voters. Most members in attendance at the meeting felt that the last election regarding this issue had a question that was too long and complicated and voters did not understand what they were voting on. We have received numerous comments from other residents who felt they had misunderstood the question and would have voted differently if they knew what it was they read. MN Statutes Chapter 410.12., subd. 5, allows the City Council to propose an amendment by ordinance subject to Charter Commission review. Given the direction of the City Council and their wish to amend the Charter, staff drafted an ordinance and reviewed it with the City Attorney. This ordinance initiates the possibility of a special election this fall and is meant to be a catalyst for discussion. Should changes be suggested that create simpler and clearer ballot language, this ordinance could possibly be modified by its second reading. Because the law appeazs to be silent on the process, it is our interpretation, should the City Council wish to proceed, that the City Council would hold a first reading of the ordinance and forward the ordinance to the Charter Commission for their review and recommendation. Once the Charter Commission has received the ordinance proposing the amendment, the Charter Commission has 60 days to amend or recommend approval or denial (August 12�'). In addition, if the Charter Commission feels it needs more time to study the proposed amendment, they may adopt a resolution requesting an additional 90 days to review the proposal (November 10). Once the proposed amendment is returned to the City Council, they may hold a second reading of the ordinance. If the City Council is interested in holding a special election this year, they may wish to convey the urgency of that message to the Charter Commission. State law requires charter amendments to be placed on the ballot for a general election be forwarded to the County 12 weeks before the general election, or by August 16, 2005. This would mean the Charter Commission would want to complete their review and recommendation by August 3`d so that staff could provide the materials to the City Council by August 8�'. Staff recommends discussion and first rea.ding of the ordinance proposing an amendment to the city charter. 105 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER, CHAPTER 7. TAXES, SECTION 7.03.A. PERTAINING TO UTILITY FEES SECTION 1. The Fridley City Council hereby finds the following: That in 2000, a successful initiative petition proposing an amendment to the Fridley City Charter requiring voter approval for tax increases beyond specified inflationary adjustments, or to create, expand or increase various fees was received and placed on the November 7, 2000, municipal election ballot. The question was approved by the voters by 57% of all people voting in the election. In an attempt to remedy confusing language contained in the amendment and potentially dangerous and costly problems for the City, an ad hoc work group met and formulated an ordinance designed to correct the language contained within the amendment. The ordinance was reviewed by the City Charter Commission and recommended to the City Council for adoption. The ordinance was approved April 9, 2001. That in 2004, due to the City's increased costs in providing the sanitary sewer, storm water and water sales to its customers, it was found that an unintended consequence to the City had been created by the amendment by not allowing the City to recover its full costs for providing sanitary sewer, storm water and water sales. The Charter Commission recommended adoption of an ordinance removing utility fees from Section 7.03.A. of the City Charter as a defined fee that could not be increased above 5% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. The City Council adopted the ordinance; however, a successful Referendum Petition requesting withdrawal of the ordinance was received and placed on the November municipal election ballot. The question approving the ordinance failed and the ordinance did not become effective. During the 2006 budget preparation and planning it was determined that sanitary sewer, storm water and water costs continue to increase due to a number of outside factors beyond the control of the city. Some of these factors include federal mandates imposing increasingly higher standards for water and sewer, higher sewage disposal charges imposed by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services agency, and ongoing repairs and maintenance of the system's infrastructure. The City Council sent a Survey to all current city commissioners to query their thoughts about utility rates. There was overwhelming agreement that the charter should be amended to allow the city to recover its costs for sanitary sewer, storm water and water sales. That a proposed charter amendment will help eliminate potential for long term subsidy of sanitary sewer, storm water and water deficits; provide cost recovery for federal or state mandates; and maintain all other spending restrictions which requires city council to obtain direct voter approval for programs that increase costs above 5% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. SECTION 2. That Chapter 5, Section 5.09 of the Fridley City Charter states that, "The ways to initiate amendments to this Charter are set forth in Minnesota Statutes. Minnesota Statutes Chapter Ordinance No. Page 3 410.12, subd. 5, allows for the city council to propose an amendment to the voters by ordinance. This ordinance shall be submitted to the charter commission for review. After the charter commission completes its review and notifies the city council of its recommendation, the city council may submit it to the people. SECTION 3. That the Fridley City Council hereby ordains that the Fridley City Charter be amended and that a Special Election be held in the City of Fridley on November 8, 2005, to allow the people to vote on the following question: Shall the Fridley City Charter be amended in a manner that removes limits on the rates that may be charged for the operation and improvement of its water, sewer and storm water systems as shown below: O Yes O No 3. Arry other fees created, or increased beyond the limits set forth in subsection 1, shall require voter approval as stipulated in subsection 2. A. For the purposes of this subsection, `fees" includes sales and use tcrxes, utility charges, (other than water, storm water and sanitary sewer sales), recycling fees, gas and electric franchise fees and any other fee that produces a tax burden or direction financial obligation for all property owners and/or residents of Fridley. B. Shall the Charter, Chapter 7, Section 7.03.8. be changed to read: For the purposes of this subsection, the term `fees" does not include: Water, storm water and sanitary sewer sales charges; Parks and Recreation Department participation charges fees, charges for photo-copying sales of municipal liquor store products, or civil and criminal fines and other charges collected in cases of restitution or violation of law or contract. The term 'fees" also does not include rental housing fees, building permit fees, liquor license fees, the extension or transfer of cable television service authority to additional service providers for which fees are already being charged, fees for the operation of junk yards, annual license fees for the operation of pawn shops and other regulated business, and any other charge for services, including health and safety related Code enforcement, and other goods, services or materials routinely provided by the City to its citizens or other members of the public which, by law, must be limited to the actual cost of the service beingprovided. The term 'fees" shall not include arry special assessments made under Minnesota Statutes Section 429. SECTION 4 That the City Clerk shall cause notice of said election to be given to the Anoka County Auditor within 53 days of said election and that notice of said election be published in the official newspaper of the City for at least three weeks prior to said election; and That the City Council ordains that the election shall be held at the usual polling locations for the state general election, as set forth in Exhibit "A," and that said election shall be held and Ordinance No. Page 4 conducted in accordance with the Minnesota State Statutes applicable to municipal elections and the provisions of the Home Rule Charter; and That the City Council shall meet within seven days from said election as required by law for the purpose of canvassing said election and declaring the results thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 2005. First Reading: Charter Commission Review: Second Reading: Publication: WARD 1 PRECINCT 1 WARD 1 PRECINCT 2 WARD 1 PRECINCT 3 WARD 1 PRECINCT 4 WARD 2 PRECINCT 1 WARD 2 PRECINCT 2 WARD 2 PRECINCT 3 WARD 2 PRECINCT 4 WARD 2 PRECINCT 5 WARD 3 PRECINCT 1 WARD 3 PRECINCT 2 WARD 3 PRECINCT 3 WARD 3 PRECINCT 4 Exhibit A Polling Locations Grace Evangelical Free Church 755 73rd Avenue Northeast Hayes Elementary School 615 Mississippi Street Northeast Fridley Municipal Center 6431 University Avenue Northeast Fridley Community Center 6085 7�' Street NE Woodcrest Elementary School 880 Osborne Road Northeast Knights of Columbus 6831 Highway #65 Northeast St. Philip's Lutheran Church 6180 Highway #65 Northeast North Park School — Gym 1 5575 Fillmore Street Northeast North Park School — Gym 2 5575 Fillmore Street Northeast Springbrook Nature Center 100 85th Avenue Northeast Redeemer Lutheran Church 61 Mississippi Way Northeast Stevenson Elementaty School 6080 East River Road Fridley Covenant Church 6390 University Avenue Northeast . � � GTY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: DATE: RE: AGENDA ITEM C1TY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 The Honorable Mayor and City Council William W. Burns, City Manager � � June 10, 2005 Resolution Supporting Springbrook Nature Center Improvements Attached is a preliminary grant application and a resolution supporting improvements to the Springbrook Nature Center. The Parks & Recreation Commission approved the preliminary grant application and a draft resolution to be adopted by Council at their meeting on Monday, June 6. Councilmember Billings requested that an additional "whereas" be included and it has been added to the end of the resolution. 8 Staff recommends Council's approval. Attachments 110 2006 Capital Bonding Request City of Fridley 1. Name of the local government that is submitting the request - City af Fridley. 2. Project title - Springbrook Nature.Center SPRING (Sanctuary Protection � Renewal Into the 1Veat Generation) Project 3. Projact priority number - NA. This is the only project submitted by the City of Fridley. 4. Project location - Springbrook Nature Center,100 85"' Avenue NE, Fridley, MN 55432. Mailiag address: Springbrook Nature Center, City of Fridley, 6431 University Avenue, Fritiley, MN 55432. 5. Total project cost -- $S,OOO,OOO.OU. 6. Request for state funds ia 2006 -- $2,SOQ,000.00. 7. Additional staxe funds to be requested for subsequent projact costsJphases in 2008 -- $0.00 8. Additional state funds to be requested for subsequent project costs/phases in 2010 -$0.00 9. Non-s�tate funds available or to be co�ributed to the pmject - Private Sources: $2,500,000.00. The matching funds for this project wiil be atquired as the result of a one year coordinated fund drive through foundations, individuals, businesses and corporations, and civic organizations. 10. Project description aad rationale: See Attachment L 11. Identify who will own the faciliiy. Ideirtify who will operate the facility - Facility es owned and operated by t6e City of Fridley. 12. Identify total project costs - Note: A preliminary glan has been created, but some chaages have been identified which may affect cost distribution. Total cast will be no greater than $5 miltion. Land Acquisition: SU.00 Pre-design: $25,000.00 Design: $375,OOQ.00 Construrtion: $4,400,000 Furniture, Firtures, Equipment: 5200,OOQ.00 Retocation: $0.00. 13. For remodeling, renovation or expansion projects IdentiFy the tAtal square footage of current facilities and new square footage requested - This is a renova�ion and ezpansion project Erissting Building: 5,486 sq ft New Square footage: 12,840 sq ft Shelters aud Pavilioas: 3,U00 sq ft, total inctudrng restrooms in the picnic pavilion. 14. Project Schedule - Fund Raising Start: May, 2006 Pre-Design Start: June, 2007 Design Start: October, 2007 Construction Start: Aprii, 2008 Certificate of Occupancy: February, 20Q9. 15. Identify any new or addi#ional state operating dollars that will be requested for this project - NA, no new or additional dotlars will be requested for this project Future operating ezpenses for Springbrook Nature Center at its current budget tevel are assured through passage of a permanent levy referendum by Fridley voters in November, 2004. Any increased operating ezpenses associated with the SPRING Project will be covered through a combination of additional revenue and funds provided by the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation. 16. Resolution of support from the governing body of the applicant - See Attachment 2. 17. Project conta.ct person -- Siah St. Clair, Springbrook Nature Center Director, Springbrook Nature Center, City of Fridley, 6431 University Avenue, Fridley, MN 55432, 763-572-3588, Faz: 763-571-1287, stciairs�a,ci.fridlev.mn.us 111 .4ttachment ] a [0: Project Descriptian and Rationale: This request is for $2,SQQ,000 in state funding to predesign, design, construct, furnish, and equip a redeveloped and expanded interpretive center and surrounding landscaped and natural area at Springbrook Nature Center, in Fridley, MN. T'he purpose of the SPRING project is to enhance Springbrook Nature Center as a learning center and as a destination and gathering place for people fram the metropolitan area, the state, and Fridley, while managing the site's social carrying ca.pacity to allow sustainable growth in use, as well as preservation of the natural bea.uty and habitat of the site's wildlife sanctuary. This project wilt upgrade and eapand diverse environmental educaxion capacity, visitor viewing, and eshibit space. It will provide e�cpanded community ce(ebration and memorial areas, as well as outdoor c[assrooms, circular pathwa.qs, wellness azeas, picnic and pavilion space, and e�cpanded parking. The Springbrook project wiII be a public demonstration of environmental and energy stewardship and will create the following smart growth and high performance building practice areas: ■ Inspirational indoor theatre/tea.ching/day meeting space (12,OOO+sq ft) ■ Interpr�tive exhibits on environmental responsibility ■ Outdoor classrooms (1 %: acres) ■ Accommor}ations for outdoor community events and gazherings (amphithea.tre, electrical, event vendor pads, circvlaz pa#h/road, seating, lighting, rest rooms) - • Memorial garden/plaza (1 %z acres) • Pavilions, shelters, and picnic azeas (3,000 sq ft--2 acres) ■ Expanded demonstration parking areas that are water permeable and minimize�or eliminate water run-0ff { 1 �/z acre) Springbrook Nature Center has been in operation for over 25 yeazs with use increasing exponentially in thax time to approacimately 180,000 visits per year. The Metropolitan Cvuncil's Regional Parks Policy Plan 200.5 projects that bv 2030 the number of householcis within a si�cteen minute drive of Springbrook Nature Center will increase by 25% to 250,000. This project will focus e�cisting and projected high impact visitor use into the interpretive center building and improved areas azound it which �vill significantly reduce the overuse impact on Springbrook's 127 acres. Springbrook Nature Center impacts the local, regional, and sta.te community in diverse azeas. It preserves open space in an increasingly urban inner ring suburb. It is an amaction f,�r businesses arid families to locate and live in the north metro area, having an economic impact on properry values. The National Audubon Society in November 2004 designated Springbrook Nature Center one of eight "Important Bird .Areas" in Minnesota.. The Blanding's turtle, a state threatened species, is found in Springbrook's wettands. Improving the quality of Springbrook's impacted wetlands has recently been the focus of a malti-city six year Clean Water Partnership Grant project. This project improves water quality before the vc��a.ter leaves Springbrook Nature Center and enters the Mississippi River, just upstream from the St. Paul and Minneapolis city water intakes. Schools and other groups from over 3� communities participate in environmental education programming at Springbrook each year. A TEA-21 funded trail corridor to be constructed during the winter of 200�- 2006 will travel through Springbroak's northern boundary and main entrance. This trail will conneet Springbrook with a nea.rby mass ttansit hub and e�cisting regiona( bike trails. Guest book signatures in recent years show visitors from over 300 Minnesota communities, ali 50 states, and 60 foreign cournries. City of Frid(ey Capital Bonding Request ,� ,� 2 Attachment la This praject wil( not compe�te with any ather nature center programs in the area. it wiIl allvw Springbrook Nature Center to improve its services to the greater community and assure the sustainability of its well recognized natura} resource base in the face of long term increasing intense use. The resutting programs, spaces, and demonstration areas will serve a diverse cross section of community, business, family, and individual needs. � City of Friclley Capital Bonding Request � � 3 I: � � � �+ � � a a � �� m � �a� �i `_ � m �, � c � �.' o� 2 , � N � a a � {, '6 r � tia � , ;i � E � o � io � ' fA U _ � �*, � �� . i a f0 � > � � � � C J � S c = � �1 �� a{a�o �� a � m l o � ~ � � 0 ��c �` � + . . . ! w �� Z ' �� . � c � �, ( { � .,� > � :; � �i � � ,t. � : � � � k'�' r ( � � ' .�'� . - �� ' v�' �� ' �; C ' � � a� Q, Q� uG > � � a O: x G 4 �� G c� o: ,� --� - �� ° a o m= � o �, 3�3 � m ms s—�'� � _�•� t � o'a ` � �w�a ��mc �`�"a g a�'m mm m > mm m �'~.'� � � c. $ � ,mo � •? �. •� � �.�� :.,,�, } � �� .s�`t ;1 ea=�� F-- g a I� � C'i . . . . K�N � �-v�� r � �" F _. '.; , r -� 1 ` , � � �J , . .. •` �+6 t� � O � � : �. � 1,�I.�� G` � LL � c m � � � � � � � � � � C �t^+ .� � ! Q /. �;. �-� � � � � � :�� _�. r .t. ��. . F :� :�, `�` � � , :' 'f�. �C, . ..J � "iv � �e, t � �t�. Q � �� '�. �. .. ., _ � ��:- � s' ' ti', -�'' . ._' _ . : s / Y',� N u.? � ,.,�f„ ' � � m d � � � Z � � ..� 9 RESOLUTION NO. 2005 - RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE IMPROVEMENTS TO SPRINGBROOK NATURE CENTER ASSOCIATED WITH THE SPRING (SANCTUARY PROTECTION & RENEWAL INTO THE NEXT GENERATIOl� PROJECT AND SUPPORTING THE REQUEST TO THE STATE OF MINNESOTA FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE WHEREAS, the Springbrook Nature Center is a 127-acre City of Fridley park that provides year- round opportunities to experience and learn about nature; and is an environmental education center that serves school groups, community organizations and families; and WHEREAS, the Springbrook Nature Center serves the people living in the north suburban area with enjoyable and educational programs, hands-on exhibits and nature center facilities; and WHEREAS, the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Project will enhance this park as a learning center for people from the metropolitan area, the State of Minnesota., and the City of Fridley; and WHEREAS, the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Project includes facility improvements that will provide spaces for education, health and wellness, community gatherings, celebrations, and business meetings; and WHEREAS, the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Project will create public spaces that � minimize future operating and environmental costs through design and technology improvements; _ and WHEREAS, the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Project has been developed with tl�e input of citizen groups, environmentalists, City officials and architects to preserve the Springbrook experience for future generations; and WHEREAS, the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation is a local non-profit organiza.tion dedicated to supporting the overa.11 planning, development and management of the Springbrook Nature Center; and WHEREAS, the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation has committed to taking the lead in raising the $2.5 million matching funds for a State grant from private sources; and WHEREAS, the increased operating costs associated with the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Project will be covered through a combination of additional program revenue and funds provided by the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation; and WHEREAS, the recent legislative shifts in government aids, levy limits and real estate tax . changes make it impossible for the City Council to pass on tax increases to Fridley property owners for the future development and future maintenance of this regional facility; = 115 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Fridley City Council supports the improvements included in the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Proj ect and recognizes the positive impact this project will have upon the citizens of the northern Twin Cities metropolitan area. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley supports the application to the State of Minnesota for financial assistance with the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Proj ect. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 13Tx DAY OF J[JNE, 2005. SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK � � CffY OF FRIDLEY T�: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 William W. Burns, City Manager Jon Fi. Fiaukaas, Public Works Director May 26, 2005 Award of Contract for Energy Saving Devices PW05-036 The City has met with and received a proposal from a company called enerTECFi of Minneapolis, MI`i, to install Redi/Volt Surge Protection to several of our wellhouse facilities. The devices eliminate electrical surges and transient voltages that reduce the efficiency and can damage the electric motors powering our well pumps. As an added advantage, enerTECFi guarantees a minimum of a 20% savings in our energy costs leading to a 35 month rate of return on our expenditure. The City of Coon Rapids and several other private corporations have installed these devices and have given us positive responses on the results they have seen so far. The total cost of the project is �58,000 and would be paid for from the water fund. We are guaranteed a minimum savings of �19,400 annually. Recommend the City Council award a contract on the amount of �58,000 to enerTECl1 of Minneapolis for the installation of Redi/Volt Surge Protection dev ices to wells 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, ll and 12. � � � � � � � PROPOSAL - ..1� . � { . - ' , i-_ i : .. CITY OF FRIDLEY WELLS 2,5,6,8, 8� 10 THRL7 12 � Initiative: Guaranteed 20% Electrical Savings — Redi Volt Total # of Units: 29 � Total Contact Amount: $58,000.00 Payback: 35 Months ROI: 34.0% � Proiect Benefits � • Minimum 20% guaranteed electrical savings ($19,404.00 annually) — actual savings is usually greater than 20% • Reduction in Cost-of-Operation (savings not included in savings calcularions) � • $ 2.9 Million Dollar connected equipment insurance with no deductible • Lifetime equipment and labor warrantee • Increase in plant production by eliminating "down time" as a result of the negative � impact electrical surges and transients have on your mechanical equipment � Risk Assumution/Measurement: These calculations do not include savings beyond the 20% guarantee. However, most installations exceed the 20% guarantee (Insurance provider assumes a greater savings than 20%). Also, the calculated savings does not assume � additional savings from improvements in cost of operations, additional years of depreciation or benefits of equipment insurance coverage of $ 2.9 Million Dollars. If system performs minimallv as insured you will realize a 34.0% Return on vour investment. � 118 enerTECH,,,,,,�,�„�„��,:,,�.,.,, ��,f��.,�,�,t,;,�,,.,,�,,,,,��,,, �� . enerTECH.ILC. t624 Harmon Piace Swte 206 Mlnneapolis. MN SSO03 February 2005 -E11�?lri�zrir�y L pdate- Guaranteed Electrical Sar•ings . Phone: 5t2—i86-5770 Fax: ot2-486-577' E-Mail: �nertecnllc.com In various case studies, enerTECH's customers have realized a significant reduction in electrical costs. In controlled studies enerTECH has retrofitted electrical services with the RediVoltTM Energy Management System. Each Customer realized and verified significant electrical savings. Test si ts are as follows: (Savin�s verified and documented by customers) Customer International Market Square City Coon Rapids �s�sc� s�rio„> Walter G. Anderson Economart Foods Crooked Lake Lodge Cash Wise Foods Hampton Inn % Savin�s Pavback ROI 19.45 49 Mo. 24% 20.75 17.20 18.72 23.Oi 20.75 22.05 25 Mo. 47% 29 Mo. 41 % 27 Mo. 43% 32 Mo. 38% 28 Mo. 42% 36 Mo. 35% — -____--- - _ Annual 10 Year Savings Savin s $69,300 $693,000 $13,721 $137,210 $76,608 $766,080 $22,800 $228,000 $5,280 $52,800 $58,000 $580,000 $12,000 $120,000 With independent monitoring and customer verification, enerTECH has documented significant ongoing saving as a result of installing the RediVoltTM Energy Management System. To contact customers to verify the savings results please call Robert Lehmann at enerTECH @. 612-486-5775. ' 119 � � AGENDA ITEM ��F CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 13, 2005 FRIDLEY INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS