07/25/2005 - 00001206 - W a
ri
CRY OF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OF JULY 25, 2005
7:30 p.m. - City Council Chambers
Attendance Sheet
PLEASE PRINT NAME, AVVRESS AND /TEM NUMM YOU ARE WERESTFU IN.
Print Name (Clearly) Address Item No.
l
w•c a
I
o N a/ 062
'C
V4, j°10 157\ �1
.� .
1. 1
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 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 activities because of race, color, creed, religion,
national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public
assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to
participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an
interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at
572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
PROCLAMATION:
National Night Out - Tuesday, August 2, 2005
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of June 27, 2005
City Council Meeting of July 11, 2005
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Second Reading of an Ordinance Recodifying the
Fridley City Code by Amending Appendix F to
Provide for the Adjustment of Salaries for the
Mayor and Councilmembers in Accordance with
Section 2.07 of the Charter of the City of
Fridley....................................................................................................... 1 - 2
NEW BUSINESS:
2. Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission
Meeting of July 6, 2005 ..................................................................................... 3- 14
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005 PAGE 2
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
3. Special Use Permit Request, SP #05-02, by
Amtech Lighting for Holiday Companies, to
Allow a Changeable Electronic Sign Pursuant
to Section 214.07 of the Fridle�y City Code,
Generally Located at 200 — 57" Avenue N.E.
(Ward 3) ....................................................................................................... 15 - 20
4. Resolution Approving a Plat, P.S. #04-05,
Klucsar Addition, by Yoava Klucsar, for the
Purpose of Creating Two Single Family Lots,
Generally Located at 1420 Rice Creek Road N. E.
(Ward 2) ....................................................................................................... 21 - 24
5. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-06, by the
City of Fridley, to Correct Right-of-Way
Boundaries for Street Reconstruction,
Generally Located at Glen Creek Road and
Logan Parkway (Ward 3) ................................................................................... 25 - 29
6. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-07, by the
City of Fridley to Correct Right-of-Way
Boundaries for Street Reconstruction,
Generally Located at Ely Street and
Liberty Street (Ward 3) ...................................................................................... 30 - 34
7. Resolution Receiving the Preliminary Report
and Calling for a Public Hearing on the Matter of
Construction of Certain Improvements:
Neighborhood Street Improvement Project No.
ST. 2005 — 3 ...................................................................................................... 35 - 40
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005 PAGE 3
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
8. Appointment - City Employees .......................................................................... 41
9. Claims ....................................................................................................... 42
10. Licenses ....................................................................................................... 43
ADOPTION OF AGENDA.
OPEN FORUM (VISITORS): Consideration of Items
not on Agenda — 15 Minutes
OLD BUSINESS:
11. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending
Fridley City Charter, Chapter 7, Taxes,
Section 7.03.A, Pertaining to Utility Fees .......................................................... 44 - 47
NEW BUSINESS:
12. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-05, by BAE
Systems (Formerly United Defense) to Replat
Their Property, Generally Located at 4800
East River Road N. E. (Ward 3) .......................................................................... 48 - 53
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005 PAGE 4
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
13. Master Plan Amendment Request,
MP #05-01, by Yale Place Associates to
Increase the Number of Surface Parking
Spaces and Permit the Construction of a
Raised Parking Structure, Generally Located
at 6499 University Avenue N.E. (Ward 1) ......................................................... 54 - 63
14. Approve Change Order No. 1 for the 2005
Neighborhood Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 2005 — 1 ............................................................................................... 64 - 65
15. Informal Status Reports ..................................................................................... 66
ADJOURN.
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
NATIONAL NIGHT OUT
Tuesday, August 2, 2005
WHEREAS, the National Association of Town Watch (NATYV) is sponsoring
a unique, nation-wide crime, drug and violence prevention progr�am on
August 2, 2005, called "National Night Out"; and
WHEREAS, the "22nd Annual National Night Out" provides a unique
opportunity for Fridley to join forces with thousands of other communities
across the country in promoting cooperative, police-community crime
prevention efforts; and
WHEREAS, Fridley residents play a vital role in assisting the Fridley Police
Department through joint crime, drug and violence prevention efforts in
Fridley and by supporting "National Night Out 2005" locally; and
WHEREAS, it is essential that all citizens of Fridley be aware of the
importance of crime prevention progr�ams and the impact that their
participation can have on reducing crime, drugs and violence in Fridley; and
WHEREAS, police-community partnerships and neighborhood safety,
awareness and cooperation are important themes of the "National Night Out"
progr�am;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Scott J. Lund, Mayor of the
City of Fridley, do hereby proclaim Tuesday, August 2, 2005, as:
NAT=ONAL N=GHT OUT
BE IT FtIRTHER RESOLVED, that I, Mayor Scott J. Lund, do hereby call
upon all citizens of Fridley to join the Fridley Police Department and the
National Association of Town Watch in supporting the "22nd Annual
National Night Out" on August 2, 2005.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my
hand and caused the seal of the City of
Fridley to be affixed this 25th day of July,
2005.
SCOTT J. LUND, MAYOR
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF FRIDLEY
J U N E 27, 2005
The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at
7:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund
Councilmember-at-Large Barnette
Councilmember Billings
Councilmember Wolfe
Councilmember Bolkcom
OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager
Fritz Knaak, City Attorney
Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator
Rebecca Brazys, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
• Approval of Minutes — City Council Meeting of June 13, 2005
APPROVED
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 15, 2005.
RECEIVED.
2. Approve Change Order No. 1 to the Design Contract with SEH, Inc., for the
2005 Neighborhood Street Improvement Project No. ST 2005-1.
Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated the list of additional services includes the revision of
electronic right-of-way files, assistance with right-of-way acquisition documents and
revision of contract documents to satisfy the Rice Creek Watershed District. Staff
recommends Council's approval.
APPROVED.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 2 of 31
3. Claims (122041 — 122233).
APPROVED.
4. Licenses.
APPROVED.
5. Estimates.
APPROVED.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to adopt 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 Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, 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.
Bob Chapert, owner of Main Event, presented a petition to amend the liquor ordinance
to allow Texas Hold'em tournaments or contests based on the bill recently approved by
the State of Minnesota. He explained that not only does the Main Event support this
request, but Joe DiMaggio's and the American Legion do as well. The petition also
requested Council to review the liquor ordinance stating that no sale of alcoholic
beverages may be made on Christmas Day, December 25. They are asking that the
ordinance be amended to a 24-hour period from December 24 at 6:00 p.m. to
December 25. They have a lot of patrons requesting they be open to serve food.
Mayor Lund stated Council would take this matter under advisement.
MOTION by Mayor Lund, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to receive the petition,
dated June 27, 2005.
Councilmember Billings asked what cities around Fridley currently allow such
tournaments.
Mr. Chapert stated Mounds View, St. Louis Park, Blaine, Coon Rapids, and Anoka.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 3 of 31
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Peter Borman, 120 River Edge Way and President of the 49'er Days Festival, thanked
the City, City staff inembers, and Police and Fire employees for their help in making this
year's festival a success.
Gerald Mackelberg, 425 Rice Creek Boulevard, stated he lives in the area immediately
south of Columbia lce Arena and the residents in that area are concerned about the
potential sale of the arena. It would be much better for the City to purchase that
property and thereby have control over how it will be developed. He asked that the City
ensure that in the future, it does a better job of keeping the residents informed about
what transpires on this property. He suggested this would be a good location for a new
public safety building for the City of Fridley.
Councilmember Billings pointed out that the recent City newsletter contained a large
article about the status of Columbia Arena with questions and answers from the
Minnesota Sports Commission. He added that the City of Fridley does not control that
site. Also, the Minnesota Sports Commission held an informational meeting with the
users of that arena and the surrounding neighborhood.
Mayor Lund said he understood Mr. Mackelberg's concerns.
OLD BUSINESS:
6. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-03, by Timothy VanAuken, to Subdivide
Two Multi-Family Lots, Generally Located at 1475 and 1485 73rd Avenue NE
(Ward 2) (Tabled June 13, 2005).
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, explained that the property involved
fronts on 73rd Avenue and currently has two single family homes. The homes have
recently been resided and re-roofed. There was some question regarding whether
permits had been obtained for those improvements, so Mr. Hickok reviewed the history
of building permits issued for this property. To the north is a short dead-end street in
front of a home at 1479 73 '/ Avenue. Some of the issues that came up at the last
meeting had to do with the most appropriate access to this site. Staff reviewed the
access options and determined that a cul-de-sac that would only involve the lots being
subdivided would be the best solution. There were concerns expressed about a
standard size cul-de-sac which would affect an existing fire hydrant and mature trees.
As a result, the proposed standard size cul-de-sac has a design that will be able to be
plowed by Public Works and to allow access for emergency vehicles but will only take
its radius from the south side of what would be the right-of-way of 73'/ Avenue. Taking
away enough land area from one property to allow for the cul-de-sac could be
detrimental to the subdivision of that property. For that purpose, this is being proposed
as an easement for roadway and utility purposes. This proposed cul-de-sac shifts the
buildable area a bit south taking it back from the street. Neighbors were concerned
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 4 of 31
about the proposed units being up close right across from their property but this has the
effect of moving the buildings back a bit. It also reduces the rear yard to 25 feet. In the
ordinance, the R-3 code talks about a rear yard setback of'/4 of the lot depth but no less
than 25 feet. By approving this plat as it is being proposed and recommended by staff,
it does recognize a setback of 25 feet as opposed to 33 feet. Considering all
alternatives, this proposal would be the best for allowing the lots to be properly placed.
This proposal does provide for the neighbors to the north to preserve their mature trees.
It allows Mary Jane Hanson to subdivide her property in the future if she chooses to do
so. It also takes as little property from Ms. Hanson as possible while still giving her the
ability to access the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Hickok said there were a number of questions submitted via email which he
responded to except for those that came in late. One of those questioned how the
Council could invoke the Comprehensive Plan in one hearing and ignore it in the next,
specifically the inconsistencies in zoning. He pointed out that the zoning on petitioner's
property is R-3, and the property is able to be subdivided in the manner proposed. As
far as the inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan, he stated that during the
Comprehensive Plan review staff pointed out to Council some zoning inconsistencies
and the Council directed staff to review such inconsistencies as projects were brought
forward. The developer has submitted an application that is permissible in the existing
zoning.
Mr. Hickok stated another question regarded the single family attached development
being proposed for this site. He explained the petitioner is proposing to construct two
two-unit town home buildings for a total of four units which is a permitted use in this
zoning district. In response to the question regarding the minimum lot size for each unit,
Mr. Hickok explained that each of the two unit buildings is acting together as a building
and together they exceed the 10,000 square foot minimum land area. Another question
was how these would be separately owned parcels under the units. Staff knows from
past experience that associations with less than 40 units are not successful or strong in
the town home development world. Developers do not want to create small
associations because associations are typically internal and it is very difficult even with
40 units to get people to serve on the association board to manage the property. With
smaller unit numbers, it is not unusual to have the land underneath the buildings owned
by the individuals who own the individual units. This project is not being proposed to
somehow create a 5,000 square foot property that could later have two units on it. As
far as the question regarding variances, he explained that by having the burden of all of
the cul-de-sac on the developer's property it moves the units south and creates a
situation where they have a reduced yard setback of 7 feet. In spite of that, Council
does have in its authority the ability to grant variances through the platting process.
Staff recommends approval of this proposal including the rear yard variance.
Councilmember Barnette asked what the rear yard setback is for the homes currently on
73rd Avenue.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 5 of 31
Mr. Hickok stated as proposed the rear yard of 1475 would be 35.82 feet and the
detached garage setback will be 8 feet. The rear yard setback for the home at 1485
setback is closer to 40 feet.
Councilmember Billings asked if there are other 0 lot line, two-unit homes in the City.
Mr. Hickok responded that there are a number of side-by-side lots throughout the City.
A recently approved development on University Avenue with 6 town homes with each
town home owning the footprint under their building is considered a 0 lot line
development.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Hickok to review the rear yard setback on this
proposal.
Mr. Hickok explained that by having the full cul-de-sac come down on the petitioner's
side of the right-of-way, it shifted the buildable area south. The rear yard variance
would not be necessary if the units were moved closer to the cul-de-sac but staff
believed having vehicles fully parked on the driveway of the proposed units is better
than having a situation where they have to rely on the right-of-way to park. Moving the
units to the south also allows for a bigger front yard and a more appealing separation
from the neighbors.
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that this development could be accomplished with
a dead end street but the cul-de-sac is a better option in staff's opinion.
Mr. Hickok agreed.
Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, commented the ease of maintenance and ease of
access are valid concerns and the cul-de-sac addresses those concerns.
Mayor Lund asked about the front yard setback.
Mr. Hickok explained that is one of the features that made it important for the developer
to provide an easement as opposed to a right-of-way. The front property line remains in
its current position and the cul-de-sac will be on the petitioner's property, and he has
allowed the street and utility improvements by easement.
Mayor Lund stated that another neighbor's concern regarded whether or not a building
permit was issued for the garage improvement on the petitioner's property.
Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, explained that staff does not list every permit in the
cover sheets provided.
Mr. Hickok reviewed the permits pulled for the petitioner's property including a permit for
a garage addition in 1998.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 6 of 31
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Mr. Knaak concurs with Mr. Hickok's interpretation of
the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Knaak stated he does concur.
Pam Reynolds, 1241 Norton, stated as it sits, the frontage of the properties is R-3.
Once subdivided, the twin homes will be on R-3 but facing into an R-1 neighborhood.
Currently the zoning is inconsistent and by subdividing they will be making two
inconsistent properties.
Councilmember Bolkcom pointed out there is an R-3 use behind this property and the
petitioner's property is currently zoned R-3.
Ms. Reynolds stated that the petitioner's property is adjacent to R1 uses.
Sue Sherek, 1530 73 '/ Avenue, stated the apartment building is completely fenced off
from the neighborhood by a six-foot high solid wood fence and does not access 73rd
Avenue. The City is supposed to bring non-conforming property into conformity with the
approval of the Comprehensive Plan. Waiting to treat non-conformities on a case-by-
case basis is taking away the Comprehensive Plan and creating spot zoning. While she
understands Mr. VanAuken's desire to develop his property, she has a question about
the concept of using an easement versus right-of-way for the cul-de-sac. Placing the
cul-de-sac entirely on the petitioner's property means that each of the properties are
under the 10,000 square foot minimum, the setback requirements are not met, the lot
area requirements are not met and Lots 2 and 3 exceed the 30% lot coverage
requirement. This is a case of someone trying to put too much on too little property. In
the subdivision section of the City Code, 211.04, it requires the covenants to be
recorded. She does not understand how, without an association, the twin homes will be
governed.
Mr. Hickok explained that the neighborhood was extremely concerned about this
property being developed off a dead-end street versus a cul-de-sac. The cul-de-sac
can happen without impacting the Jackels property or the Hanson property by having
the full burden of the cul-de-sac brought down to the petitioner's property. The purpose
of the easement versus right-of-way allows the lots to remain. The underlying property
is still owned and the calculations for lot coverage still remain intact even though the
developer has dedicated an easement of a portion of the property which is formal
permission for street and utility work. The developer assumes the entire burden of the
cul-de-sac including the costs. It does not result in the lots being non-conforming.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the petitioner did not put the entire cul-de-sac on his
property would there be sufficient existing right-of-way.
Mr. Haukaas stated the north half of the existing street is on an easement, not a right-of-
way. Additional easement or right-of-way would have to be obtained from the properties
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 7 of 31
to the north to construct the right-of-way if it is not placed entirely on the petitioner's
property.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that this is a trade-off; property could be taken from
adjacent property owners, but by placing the cul-de-sac on the petitioner's property,
there is less of an impact.
Mr. Haukaas stated that is correct.
Mr. Hickok stated that initially the petitioner will own all the units and file documents that
would set a certain standard and shared responsibility on the units and properties. This
proposal is purposely done in a way where each person owns and is responsible for
their individual unit.
Councilmember Bolkcom suggested these concerns be addressed in an additional
stipulation.
Mr. VanAuken stated he understands the neighbors' concerns and stated if and when
these properties are sold there will be restrictions filed specifying how improvements will
be handled. He further stated he plans to build only one building, living on one side and
renting the other. Then, within 2 to 5 years, he would erect the second building. He
plans to build something very nice for his family's financial security.
Mayor Lund asked Mr. VanAuken why he did not just build single family homes.
Mr. VanAuken said the cost of street improvements makes it prohibitive to build only a
single family home.
Councilmember Billings asked if these are the first two 0 lot line twin homes built in the
Twin Cities.
Mr. Hickok responded they are not. This is a very popular style home with probably
thousands in the Twin Cities area.
Councilmember Billings asked if there has been a lot of conversation about disputes
between twin home residents as far as maintenance issues.
Mr. Hickok stated he is not aware of any.
Councilmember Wolfe commented that there are twin homes in Columbia Heights
where such conflicts occur.
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that the same could be said about single family
homes.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 8 of 31
John Jackels, 1479 73 '/ Avenue, stated he is still concerned about the setback and
easement issues. He also believes that this proposal is putting a lot of stuff on a small
space. He said he does not want to say no to development, but he wants everyone to
be on the same page because otherwise they are not going to have a friendly
neighborhood. He claimed he had to obtain a variance two years ago because he could
not build onto the front based on the setback requirements.
Mr. Hickok explained Mr. Jackels' variance was to the rear yard, not the front yard.
There was not at any time, a situation where Mr. Jackels was adding on to the front of
his house. He offered to take a look at Mr. Jackels' property to determine whether or
not he can expand his home into the front yard. What is being proposed by the
petitioner is consistent with what has been done in other areas of the City.
Mayor Lund stated Council has allowed a relaxation of setbacks in the front yard to
allow older homes in the City to expand.
Mr. Jackels pointed out there are single family homes around the petitioner's property
and this proposal would double the density and impact the neighborhood. The
apartment building traffic does not utilize 73'/ Avenue and is separated completely.
Councilmember Barnette asked if the installation of this cul-de-sac creates a situation
for the property on the northwest corner to split for development.
Mr. Hickok stated that property could subdivide, but it is zoned R-1 and would have to
be single family homes. The important thing to remember for this proposal is that Mr.
VanAuken's property is zoned R-3. He is not asking for a rezoning. Also, his property
is roughly the size of the property to the west where a 21-unit apartment building was
permissible and constructed.
Mr. Haukaas explained that Mr. VanAuken has requested the City build the cul-de-sac
and assess him, which the City has done and is willing to do for this petitioner. At this
time, the City would leave the existing cul-de-sac alone because it is in the City's 3-year
plan for reconstruction at which time it would be removed and replaced with a straight
road. Another option is the City could begin the process for that small portion this
summer, set public hearings and do it all at once. Mr. VanAuken is not being held
responsible for removal of the existing cul-de-sac. This was going to be rebuilt as a full
cul-de-sac at some time in the future. The properties directly to the east of the existing
cul-de-sac would be assessed for the street improvement and that public hearing
process has not begun.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated it seems cleaner to her if the existing cul-de-sac would
be removed at the same time Mr. VanAuken's cul-de-sac is installed.
Mayor Lund and Councilmember Barnette asked how the properties on the existing cul-
de-sac would be impacted.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 9 of 31
Mr. Haukaas stated they would be assessed and would have a longer driveway and a
little more yard.
Mr. Hickok stated there will also be a development agreement associated with this
proposal that would be reviewed by Council.
Mr. Knaak stated the development agreement is the vehicle by which the City can
impose, in the negotiation process, certain conditions that would bind the property in the
future, such as provision for maintenance.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Mr. Knaak believes that including the maintenance
concerns in the development agreement eliminates the need for an additional stipulation
regarding future maintenance.
Mr. Knaak responded that is correct.
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to deny
Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-03.
Mayor Lund stated he understands the concerns of the neighborhood but believes that
the applicant has the right to develop his property as it is zoned. Legally, he believes
the petitioner has the right to develop his R3 property.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING AYE AND MAYOR
LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND
COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION FAILED ON A FOUR TO ONE VOTE.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to
approve Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-03, by Timothy VanAuken, with the following
12 stipulations:
1) Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
2) Any remaining debris from demolition of existing structures 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 permits.
7) Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees, including sanitary
sewer extension.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 10 of 31
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.
12) The petitioner shall file a perpetual easement for access to Lot 1 on the
records of Lot 2 and a perpetual easement for Lot 4 on the records of Lot 3.
Councilmember Billings stated the property is zoned R-3 and could develop into
something with 18 to 20 units or more with access to 73 '/ Avenue, in which case
instead of having four families driving in and out, there could be 18 to 20 or more.
There is somewhat of an inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan, but what is being
proposed is 4 single family units that happen to be two 0 lot line units. He questioned
whether that really is inconsistent with the Comp Plan because the homes that are
going to be there will be single family, 0 lot line homes. If the City were to rezone it to
R-1, the City would be looking at the possibility of a taking in which case the City would
have to pay money to the landowner for depriving him of something he already has.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE,
COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING AYE
AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED ON A FOUR TO ONE VOTE.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated she would like staff to look at the possibility of taking
out the existing cul-de-sac at the same time the new cul-de-sac is being constructed
and do the proper hearings and notices.
NEW BUSINESS:
7. First Reading of an Ordinance Approving a Rezoning, ZOA #05-02, from
C-1, 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, (by Family Lifestyle Development
Corporation) (Ward 2).
Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, stated petitioner is requesting a rezoning of five lots to
S-2 Redevelopment District. The lots are located at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street
and 6421, 6441 and 6461 Central Avenue. City Council approved the preliminary plat
to subdivide these five parcels into one at their June 13, 2005 meeting. The lots on
6441 and 6421 Central have both residential and commercial zoning. The rezoning to
S-2 makes it possible for the developer to build a mixed use development on this site
with retail and housing combined in one development. There was some discussion at
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 11 of 31
the public hearing on June 13 regarding spot zoning. Staff has looked into this and
determined that this property is designated for redevelopment in the Comprehensive
Plan. A lengthy public record was established with this petitioner's original development
request in which there was significant opposition to including the property along 64tn
Avenue. The area on the other side of Central Avenue has been recently rezoned to
S-2.
Ms. Jones explained that approving this rezoning is also approving the Master Plan for
this project. The S-2 zoning requires the City to approve a Master Plan. That Master
Plan document has been modified since the last meeting to reflect the right-in and right-
out entrance being required by Anoka County. Any modifications to the Master Plan
following the second reading of the ordinance must be brought back to Council for
approval. The ordinance before Council refers specifically to the revised Master Plan
documents dated June 22, 2005. In analyzing the rezoning, staff looks at the
Comprehensive Plan. This proposed retail/housing project does meet several
objectives in the City's Comprehensive Plan, one being to provide more efficient land
use in this area, one to provide senior housing and one to provide additional tax base
and new jobs. A public hearing on this matter was held June 13, 2005, and the
Planning Commission held a public hearing June 1, 2005. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the rezoning with stipulations.
Ms. Jones stated staff concurs with the Planning Commission's recommendation to
approve Rezoning Request, ZOA #05-02, because the proposed rezoning is consistent
with the City's Comprehensive Plan, provides senior housing opportunities, provides
additional retail opportunities, and provides additional job opportunities. Stipulation #1
has been modified to reflect the correct date of the new Master Plan document as June
22. Stipulation #21 has been modified to reflect the change requested by
Councilmember Billings. After reviewing the right-in and right-out modifications to this
plan requested by Anoka County, staff was concerned about the access to this property
for fire equipment. After discussions and review by the Fire Department, it was
determined that the turning radius should be fine.
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that not only does Council have a legal opinion
from the City attorney but also from John Baker, the attorney that represents the
League of Minnesota Cities. She asked Ms. Jones to review Mr. Baker's findings.
Ms. Jones read a portion of Mr. Baker's comments as follows: ". .. the phrase, spot
zoning `refers to an arbitrary zoning or rezoning of a small tract of land that is not
consistent with the comprehensive land use plan and primarily promotes the private
interest of the owner rather than the general welfare."' She stated the S-2 zoning being
proposed for this site is consistent with the Comp Plan and consistent with the
surrounding area. This proposed rezoning also solves existing zoning problems.
Councilmember Bolkcom pointed out that Council's packet for this meeting includes a
copy of the public hearing notice as well as a listing of individuals who were notified via
mail of the public hearing for this proposal.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 12 of 31
Ms. Jones added that in addition to the Planning Commission public hearing on such
rezonings, the City of Fridley chooses to hold a public hearing at the Council level which
is not required by State statutes.
Mayor Lund asked Mr. Knaak the City is required to mail written notices of public
hearings to surrounding property owners for both the Council meeting and the Planning
Commission meeting.
Mr. Knaak responded the notification required by statute is for the first public hearing at
the Planning Commission level. Even in that case, the law provides that if the City
makes a good faith attempt, even if there is a mistake or if half of the notices do not
reach the intended recipients, that in and of itself does not invalidate the public hearing.
Mayor Lund asked if the 18 foot setback on the east side of the development is west of
the alleyway easement.
Mr. Jones stated the setback is 18 feet from the property line and there is an additional
8-foot right-of-way to the east of the property which provides a 26-foot setback from the
single family property line to the east.
Mayor Lund asked if the east side is considered the rear or side yard and what the
required setback would be.
Ms. Jones responded that is considered the side yard and a 15 foot setback is required.
Councilmember Barnette asked about the question a resident had regarding the lift
station on Central Avenue and how the drainage from this site and the Town Center
Development project will impact that station.
Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, responded that the lift station is for sanitary
sewers, not ground water, so it has nothing to do with the drainage from either
development. However, that lift station can handle the additional sewerage as recent
upgrades have been completed and there is plenty of capacity.
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that she received an email from a resident who is
concerned about this proposal because she lives in an R-1 zoning district and was
concerned that the City may eventually rezone her property.
Mr. Hickok stated he is not certain where this resident's property is, but if her property is
surrounded by R-1 zoning, she is not on the edge where the S-2 redevelopment is
defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The City guided this area as S-2 development in
the Comprehensive Plan revisions in 2001 and as a result, S-2 zoning is the perfect
match. The resident in the R-1 zoning is guided to be R-1. Further to the east of the
petitioner's property, the area is guided and zoned as R-1, Single Family. There is no
plan at this time to take S-2 further to the east.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 13 of 31
Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated he received the same email and one of that resident's
concerns stemmed from the recent Supreme Court case on eminent domain. The
project before Council is not a"taking." It is not a City project, but a private
development.
Councilmember Wolfe commented that there are instances where municipalities have
redeveloped and rezoned property.
Mr. Hickok stated it is important to point out that even if the City were to do such a
change, there would be a process required including a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and rezoning process.
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that the City would legally be hard pressed to go
into an R-1 area and rezone it without strong reasons.
Mark Schwartz, 1372 64t" Avenue, presented a letter from Jesse Collard and Aimee
Stanford expressing their opposition to this proposal.
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to receive
the June 27 letter from Jesse Collard and Aimee Stanford into the record.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Schwartz asked if this proposal meets fire code regulations. He thought there was
too much building on this property. The density for this proposal is virtually the same as
the original and the lot coverage is actually greater.
Ms. Jones stated the Fire Department has been involved in reviewing this proposal from
the beginning and this building and the site meet all fire code regulations.
Barb Edwards, 1403 64t" Avenue, questioned why she did not receive a notice
regarding the public hearing.
Mayor Lund reviewed the procedure followed by the City to provide a public hearing
notice for both hearings and a direct mailing for the Planning Commission hearing.
Susan Okeson, 1423 64t" Avenue, stated half of the property being discussed is zoned
single family. The block of Central Avenue and Mississippi is all single family homes
except for the welding shop. The whole block is wooded area with most homes on one
acre lots. The Planning Commission recommended saving as many mature trees as
possible and now the developer is proposing rain gardens with no mature trees
remaining. Something more appropriate would be to develop the front lots along
Central as they are zoned and subdivide the back of those lots in single family as it is
currently zoned. She expressed her opposition to this proposal as it changes the
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 14 of 31
characteristic of the neighborhood and is not consistent with the existing single family
homes.
Ray McAfee, 1360 Hillcrest Drive, stated he has lived at this address for nearly 50
years. Central Avenue is a two-lane highway and Mississippi is a two-lane street with
excessive peak hour traffic. He stated this development is too much for the area and
will disrupt the neighborhood.
Bonnie Marihart, 1443 64t" Avenue, said this proposal will change the surrounding
properties. She pointed out that there are two dead strip malls in the area and
questioned if the proposed retail will really be adding jobs or just moving them from
another site. Many of the residents purchased property in this neighborhood because of
the green space, and they do not want it to change.
Joan Olson, 6320 Van Buren, stated she is extremely concerned that the City may, at
some point in the future, change her neighborhood to S-2. The price of the smallest
condominium unit for this proposal would require an income in excess of $24,000
annually which is not affordable for most seniors.
Jean Schwartz, 1372 64t" Avenue, stated she and her husband checked the zoning
around their property before they purchased. She did not think it was fair to change
rules mid-stream. They live in R-1 zoning and have done extensive remodeling under
the R-1 restrictions. She re-presented the petition opposing the original proposal on this
site.
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to receive
this petition dated February 11, 2004, into the record.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Ms. Schwartz presented copies of three emails she sent to Council. She stated the
density for this proposal is the same as the original and the lot coverage is greater. She
also referred to the 11 reasons the Council denied this proposal originally, most of
which she believed to still be valid. She further stated that there are many areas in the
Comprehensive Plan that this project does not follow. The average residential density
in Fridley is 3.5 per acre for single family and 9 units per acre for multi-family. Following
that, this petitioner should only be allowed 38 units on this property. In this particular
neighborhood, she believed the single family density would actually be 1.1 per acre. As
far as the claim that this proposal provides needed housing, the Town Center
Development project across the street provides the same housing. Also, the Town
Center development is on vacant land that was zoned commercial and industrial and
adjoins R2 land, not R1 land. Town Center was also required to be set back 50 feet
from the residential property, not 18 or 40 as this proposal is on the east and south.
Also, when the Town Center rezoning was approved, the Council promised that it would
not set a precedent for this area. She also referred to traffic concerns and long-
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 15 of 31
standing drainage issues in this area. Some of them have been corrected and some of
them have not. She stated the neighbors are not opposed to redevelopment on this
site; particularly some of the property is in poor condition. But they want the
development to be appropriate for the neighborhood. She would like to see single
family or cottage/village type development. With land at a premium, she stated it seems
unreasonable for Council to think that if they do not approve this project, nothing will be
built there soon. She urged Council not to settle for this project because it is
inappropriate for the area.
Virgil Okeson, 1423 64t" Avenue, stated the road easement east of the proposed
development is currently green space. There is no division between the R-1 zoning and
the proposed rezoning. He also believes this proposal would significantly change the
neighborhood.
Kurt Olson, 1385 64t" Avenue, asked what happens to the alley right-of-way if this
property is developed. He also questioned if this will impact his ability to split his
property and sell-off parts of his lot and if so, he believed that would be an infringement
on his rights as a property owner.
Mr. Haukaas stated there are no plans to do anything different; there's a storm sewer in
that right-of-way and it will remain as is. As far as the future development of Mr. Olson's
property, he stated he would have to review the site. Since the project before the
Council this evening will not change that right-of-way, he does not see how it would
impact Mr. Olson's property.
Councilmember Billings commented there currently is no way to access the back of Mr.
Olson's property from 64t" Avenue or Arthur Street and the proposal before the Council
will not change that in any way.
Mr. Olson stated all the Council has heard from is the many residents opposed to this
project and the only person in support is the petitioner himself.
Councilmember Barnette stated he has received calls from people in favor of this
proposal.
Andrea Olson, 1385 64t" Avenue, stated what the neighbors are asking for is fairness.
She could not understand how the City can allow a developer to proceed with a plan
that has so many shortages just because of an overwhelming financial burden.
Councilmember Billings asked Ms. Olson to clarify her remarks.
Ms. Olson stated the residents have heard that sacrifices have to be made with this
proposal, such as County easement, on parking, on height, on planting in order for this
project to go through as proposed. If the petitioner cannot afford to develop this
property correctly, that is not the burden of the surrounding residents.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 16 of 31
Councilmember Bolkcom stated she has never heard the comment related to a financial
burden for the developer. In fact, the developer is granting easements to Anoka County
which he does not have to do.
Ms. Olson stated in order to make a profit, the developer has to have a certain density
and that density means a large building that does not fit on this property and taking out
single family homes in order to be able to fit this project into the limited acreage. It
means that if you have to throw in retail to make a profit then you have certain parking
requirements that do not fit on this property. It means that because the water table is
too high, the property has to be bermed up. Every time the residents have questions,
they get soft answers, mixed words, and picking and choosing pieces out of the
Comprehensive Plan. There were a number of reasons why the original proposal was
denied and she is not hearing how this proposal is any different.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that has been discussed at this meeting and the
previous meeting. There are differences.
Ms. Olson stated the density is higher per acre now than it was originally.
Mr. Hickok stated the density is not higher on this project. In the findings of fact for the
denial of the 90-unit project for this site, the reference was to population density. As a
result, the developer dropped the proposal by 20 units.
Councilmember Bolkcom said that in response to the residents' concerns about traffic
on 64t" Avenue; those parcels along 64t" were not included in this new proposal.
Ms. Olson asked if the right-in and right-out proposal will create more traffic on 64t" as
people use that roadway to turn around.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated the same concerns were expressed about the
Christianson Crossing proposal and there have been no problems that she is aware of.
Ms. Olson asked what recourse the residents have if they start counting additional cars
on 64th Avenue after this development goes in.
Mayor Lund stated that issue has been adequately addressed.
Councilmember Billings reminded those present that there have already been two public
hearings on this matter and there is no public hearing scheduled for this item on
tonight's agenda. There are other items on the agenda and other people present for
those items and in fairness to them, he did not believe Council should continue to go
over and over things that have already been discussed.
Ms. Olson stated Denial #6 of the previous proposal talked about inadequate setback
for parking and diminished landscape and on-sight snow storage. She stated there are
still a considerable number of parking areas outside the parking setback.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 17 of 31
Mr. Hickok stated that only 3 stalls on the north are less than the required setback, and
that is due to the additional right-of-way Anoka County is requiring along Mississippi and
Central. He further stated that City staff has reviewed this plan and it meets snow
storage requirements. It is an S-2 development that includes flexibility in the site plan
and those are non-issues from a staff recommendation perspective.
Ms. Olson stated the flexibility Mr. Hickok refers to equates to variances to the residents
because that is what they would have to seek in order to have those flexibilities. She
asked about Denial #7 which referred to snow storage impeding site line in the corners
of the property.
Mr. Hickok explained that there are locations on the site itself for snow storage and
those areas to the north are in broad right-of-ways. Further, in City and County
projections going out as far as anyone can tell, there is not going to be development
east on Mississippi or north and south on Central adequate enough to broaden that
intersection and take the right-of-way the County has asked for. This is not viewed as
an impediment to the site or visibility on the roadway.
Ms. Olson stated Denials #9 and #10 address sunlight issues, yet this proposal is for
the same height building.
Mr. Hickok stated that is incorrect. This proposal dropped the building height an entire
story (10 feet) and the building has been moved north, farther away from the residential
areas that expressed those concerns. He also pointed out, if the intention is to kill the
recommendation for this 70-unit building, the litigation on the table is to go back to a 90-
unit building.
Ms. Olson asked how this proposal is going to address the screening concerns.
Mayor Lund stated those issues were addressed at the Planning Commission meeting
and again at the Council's public hearing.
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, waive the
first reading and deny the ordinance on first reading.
Mayor Lund asked if there is any further action required by Council on this issue after
tonight's meeting.
Ms. Jones stated the second reading of the ordinance on the rezoning will be held
July 11 and approval of the final plat at a later date.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING
AYE AND COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND
COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION FAILED TO CARRY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 18 of 31
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to waive
the first reading of the ordinance and approve the ordinance on first reading with the
following 23 stipulations:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
Property to be developed in accordance with Master Plan — Landscape &
Grading Plan MP-1.0 and Master Plan — Utility & Grading Plan MP-2.0 dated
June 22, 2005.
Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan
A7 and A8, titled Exterior Elevations, revised 5/19/05 and architectural plan A-
3 titled Building Plan Ground Level, dated 4/29/05.
Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
Petitioner to meet the applicable fire code requirements in the International
Fire Code.
Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements.
Demolition permits shall be obtained shall be obtained for removal of the
buildings at 1314 and 1340 Mississippi Street and 6421 Central.
Petitioner to provide revised Certificate of Exemption for wetland and to meet
the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building
perm it.
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.
Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the
county right-of-way.
Petitioner to submit revised storm water management plans and calculations
for approval by the City Engineering staff.
Storm pond maintenance agreement must be filed prior to issuance of
building permits.
Petitioner shall obtain required NPDES Permit and Rice Creek Watershed
District permits.
City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior
to issuance of building permits.
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.
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.
Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $3,2887.25 (142,924 square
feet of land times .023 per square feet).
Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the building's association documents
prior to issuance of a building permit.
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.
Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems
located on the site are properly capped or removed.
Property owner of record at time of building permit application to pay all water
and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of building permit.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 19 of 31
21) The petitioner shall be responsible for sharing the cost of any traffic
improvement necessary to accommodate the traffic specifically 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 from the site for pedestrian
connections at the north and west sides of the property.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated this is a different project than the 71-unit proposal from
last year. A lot of the issues for that denial have been addressed.
Councilmember Wolfe commented that he was frustrated with the threat of legal action.
Mayor Lund stated that while the petitioner has made considerable concessions, he still
has concerns about storm water drainage, the density, and the quality of life for the
area.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE, COUNCILMEMBER
BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING AYE AND MAYOR LUND
AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED ON A 3 TO 2 VOTE.
8. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-04, by Target Corporation to Subdivide a
Commercial Lot into Two Commercial Lots, Generally Located at 755 — 53rd
Avenue NE (Ward 1).
Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, stated this request is to replat one shopping center lot
to accommodate redevelopment of the existing Target and Petco stores. The site
description contains a C-3 zoning and there is no proposal to change that zoning. The
existing commercial retail building includes Target and the Petco store. The southern
end and eastern side of the lots are developed as parking. The petitioner seeks to
replat the property and redevelop the existing store into two separate buildings with their
own parcels. This is a permitted use in this zoning district. Fridley City Code requires a
minimum lot size of 35,000 square feet in a C-3 district. As proposed, Lot 1 would be
750,000 square feet and Lot 2 will be 86,000 square feet after the replat. A minimum of
25 feet of street frontage is provided for access as well for each of the parcels and they
will both take access off 53rd Avenue as they do now. Up to 40% lot coverage would be
allowed for this proposal. The Petco building is at 17% lot coverage and the Target
building is 25% lot coverage. All necessary utility and drainage easements are provided
for on the plat and the necessary building setbacks are being met with the exception of
a variance for the Petco front yard setback from 53rd Avenue. The Planning
Commission held a public hearing on June 15 and unanimously approved this proposal
with the stipulations recommended by staff. Staff recommends concurrence with the
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 20 of 31
Planning Commission recommendation as this proposal does provide redevelopment
opportunities for Fridley that are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Richard Wiebe, Westwood Professional Services, stated there were 11 stipulations at
the Planning Commission meeting and there has been a 12 stipulation added since that
meeting to clarify the screening. Basically, they are in agreement and full
understanding of the 11 stipulations and they are still considering the 12 stipulation.
Target is agreeable to provide the fencing along the west and the opening in that
fencing but they are concerned with the requirement that they build a pathway along
that area. There is a significant requirement for park fees from Target to the City so that
may be a good use of those funds if a pathway is determined to be necessary. Target
is not opposed to having the pedestrian opening in the fence or not having one.
Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Hickok for clarification on the pathway referred to in
Stipulation 12.
Mr. Hickok stated the concern is putting pedestrians in conflict with the truck traffic at
the rear of this property so the City is going to request there be an opening in the fence
for pedestrians and that a pathway along the northern edge of the parking lot be created
to get the Target customers safely to the front door.
Councilmember Billings asked about the request from Mr. Grandstrand, a neighbor to
the west, that the fence be closed.
Mr. Hickok explained in the early eighties there was a lot of discussion about the hole in
the fence that Target frequently repaired only to have the hole reappear because there
were people trying to get through. At some point, it was decided to leave the fence
open. There was mixed interest from the neighborhood about this access, and as a
result the hole in the fence has remained. From a planning perspective, as long as
people can get through there safely without carts or bicycles going through, it should be
fine.
Ms. Jones stated she spoke to another person in the neighborhood who commented
that the new store will include grocery sales and there will be those people who would
want the access through the fence to pick up grocery items. Another factor is there are
no sidewalks along 53rd Avenue so there is no safe way to access the property from the
Cherry Lane neighborhood. Staff also found out that a lot of people in that
neighborhood use the hole in the fence behind Target to get to the walking paths
around Sullivan Lake on the south side of 53rd Avenue.
Wesley Grandstrand, 5431 Madison Street, stated the pedestrian traffic utilizing this
fence access is undesirable. People litter, walk on private property, smoke and eat and
leave debris behind and they drop Target carts in that area all the time which the
residents are left to deal with. He stated he has no problem with the fence access if the
accompanying problems can be controlled. He has no objection to the redevelopment
of the Target property. He believes it will be good for the City and the neighborhood,
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 21 of 31
but as long as there is a total redevelopment, the project should be done right. He is
asking for consideration in sign location along the north border, noise from the truck
dock location, the amount and size of landscaping buffer between the residential and
commercial property (northwest corner of the property from the sound wall adjacent to
the freeway south and around the end of the cul-de-sac), the problems created by the
161 parking spaces proposed on the west side of the property, and the pedestrian
access through an inappropriate type fence. He added he would prefer to see the
pedestrian access eliminated.
Councilmember Bolkcom explained that the 161 spaces along the west side of the
property is proof of parking only and will actually be green space. She also stated that
she does not believe those spaces will ever be needed.
Mr. Wiebe referred to the presentation which reflected the new location of the loading
dock further to the south than it currently is to pull away from the residential area. He
reviewed the location of the pylon sign to the north and explained a landscaped buffer
will be added. Also, a tree inventory was done along their west boundary and within the
Target property there are over 70 trees with an average caliper of over 13.5 inches and
those trees will remain. The new building and pavement will be moved further to the
east than the existing edge. Regarding Stipulation 12, the requested pathway appears
to be on City property and he believed it would be more appropriate as a City project
rather than a Target project. Target's lighting goes off half an hour after closing so there
would not be continuous lighting or sight security in that area. He also stated there is a
potential issue as far as ADA compliance because there is a significant grade change
and the current pathway is just a dirt rut running at about a 25% slope.
Mr. Hickok commented that there are people utilizing the fence access and he believed
it would be in Target's best interest to bring the foot traffic across to the front of the store
in the safest manner possible.
A Development Manager for Target stated the fence access is not an official access
point. It is not lit like the parking lot or any other walkways and it is not ADA compliant.
This is not what they would knowingly provide their customers for access. It is simply a
hole in the fence. It is not Target's intention for this access point to be a draw for their
customers.
Councilmember Billings stated that Target would be responsible for maintaining the
fence per City code.
Mayor Lund questioned why Stipulation 12 was added if Target does not want the fence
access.
Ms. Jones explained the Planning Commission discussed Mr. Grandstrand's comments
but that is not the only reason this stipulation was added. There is a code requirement
that commercial property next to residential is required to have screening fence. Staff
recommended a fence with visibility so people using that access could see if anyone
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 22 of 31
was lurking around the fence and the vines would provide some screening. Additional
trees are not possible in this area because of the utilities buried along that property line.
Mr. Grandstrand commented that the access is makeshift at best. It is not maintained
year round.
Mayor Lund stated if Target does not want the opening, it should not be there.
Ms. Jones explained that the path is from the cul-de-sac and is paved. The opening is a
solid, defined, constructed opening in the fence with a steel post in the middle to
prevent shopping carts and bikes from getting through. What staff is suggesting is that
the access be moved further north. The grade improves as it moves north.
Mr. Wiebe stated it would be Target's preference not to have the opening in the fence at
all because it is problematic in terms of safety, lighting, and ADA compliance.
Mayor Lund pointed out that it will then be Target's responsibility to maintain the fence.
Councilmember Billings asked if Stipulation 12 should be eliminated or modified. After
some discussion, Stipulation 12 was revised as follows: "Petitioner shall replace
existing west fence from the southern edge of the adjoining City park to the northwest
corner of their property with 7' high vinyl coated chain link fence, including installation of
Engleman ivy planted 2' on center along the fence base along the Cheri Lane cul-de-
sac."
Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Wiebe if he is comfortable with Stipulation 12 as
revised.
Mr. Wiebe said he was.
Councilmember Billings stated "For the record, Target understands that they are going
to be responsible for maintaining the fence and to repair any holes that may arise."
Councilmember Bolkcom asked staff to comment on the location of the truck docks,
about which Mr. Grandstrand was concerned.
Mr. Hickok stated staff believes the dock area is in the best location and the new design
is preferred over the old design. Also, if the dock area were to be moved elsewhere on
the property, it would be problematic to neighbors who would be hearing noise they had
not before.
Councilmember Bolkcom questioned the hours of delivery.
Mr. Wiebe stated there will be an increase of one to two deliveries per day from small
delivery trucks between 8:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. There will be a total of 2 to 4 tractor
trailer deliveries per day between 4:00 to 10:00 p.m.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 23 of 31
Mayor Lund asked if there is a wall along the west edge of the loading dock.
Mr. Wiebe stated there is a low retaining wall and there will be a slight drop in grade
back into the dock with the trucks below the floor line of the building. He then reviewed
the traffic flow for the trucks utilizing the dock area; entering along Monroe Street,
traveling along the west end of the building, backing into the dock and then exiting out
the front of the building.
Dr. Burns, City Manager, asked percentage-wise, how much larger the Super Target
store will be than the existing Target store.
Mr. Wiebe stated it will be 30% larger to accommodate the grocery component.
Mayor Lund asked what is currently located on the parcel of land to the west of this site
that appears to be ponding area.
Mr. Wiebe explained that is a delineated wetland and is fully saturated with volunteer
trees, 25 to 30 feet tall, which provides a natural buffer. The only place that's absent
tree cover is at the end of Cheri Lane and that's why the proposal for the vines on the
fence.
Ms. Jones explained there is a City park adjacent to the wetland area which will provide
a natural buffer if the proof of parking is ever required to be developed.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings, seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom, to approve
Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-04 with the following 12 stipulations.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to amend
Stipulation 12 by removing the comma after the word cul-de-sac, inserting a period and
strike everything thereafter.
1) Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
2) Any remaining debris from demolition of existing buildings 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 $0.023 per square foot for a
total of $19,308.98 for both plats prior to issuance of building permits.
7) Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees, including sanitary
sewer extension.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 24 of 31
8) The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All
trees required to be removed for the new construction shall be marked and
approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permits.
9) Commercial building shall meet all parking and setback requirements unless
abated by a variance.
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.
12) Petitioner shall replace existing west fence from the southern edge of the
adjoining City park to the northwest corner of their property with 7' high vinyl
coated chain link fence, including installation of Engleman ivy planted 2' on
center along the fence base along the Cheri Lane cul-de-sac.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
TO APPROVE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST, PS #05-04, WITH 12
STIPULATIONS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
9. Variance Request, VAR #05-07, by Target Corporation to Reduce the Off-
Street Parking Space Requirements from 1,100 spaces to 700 Spaces with
Proof of Parking for an Additional 163 Spaces Generally Located at 755-53rd
Avenue NE. (Ward 1).
Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, explained that according to code, the petitioner would
need one parking stall for every 150 square feet of property which would be a total of
1,100 parking spaces. The separate parcel for the Petco store does meet the parking
requirements with 95 stalls. Target's hardship statement states "Target Corporation
conducts periodic reviews of parking utilization at their stores and prepares correlations
analysis relative to sales per store on an hourly basis... Target has calculated a future
maximum need of 600 parking spaces for the maximum sales hour (occurs the day after
Christmas.)" Fridley's code requires 1,100 stalls which is 500 more than what is
necessary for the busiest hour of the busiest day.
Ms. Jones stated a traffic analysis of this site indicates that the traffic in and out of the
Target store do not in and of themselves create an undesirable condition. Target is not
proposing to develop excess property beyond what they're currently using. The plans
provide additional green space and proof of parking for 163 spaces.
When reviewing such variance requests, Ms. Jones explained that staff considers
whether the public policy will be served, if there is a hardship, and can stipulations
ensure compliance and protect adjacent properties. In this case, staff feels public policy
would be served by reduced parking on this site because there is an over abundance of
parking at the current store and parking that is not needed puts a strain on the storm
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 25 of 31
sewer systems by increasing surface water pollutants. Target argues that strict
application of the code is a hardship because it limits the amount of green space they
can provide. Target is providing proof of parking for 163 spaces which can be
addressed in the stipulations. As far as previous cases similar to this, Ms. Jones stated
there are other commercial properties that have the same experience as Target where a
vast amount of their lot is empty, such as Sam's Club, Wal-Mart, Bachman's, Holiday,
and Ashley Furniture. Staff is looking into doing a text amendment regarding parking
stall requirements.
Ms. Jones stated staff recommends approval as did the Appeals Commission at their
last meeting due to the hardship that would be created by requiring more parking than
necessary and due to our desire to foster more green space and to decrease
impervious surfaces.
Mayor Lund asked if staff has reviewed Fridley's parking requirements compared to
other City requirements.
Mr. Hickok responded staff has done so and he believes Fridley has a much higher
standard for parking.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the entire parking lot will be repaved.
Mr. Wiebe responded that it will be.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to approve
Variance Request, VAR #05-07 with the following eight stipulations:
1) Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
2) Petitioner to meet all building, fire, and ADA requirements.
3) Existing building and proposed to be sprinkled to MN Rules Chapter 1306.
4) City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior
to issuance of building permits.
5) Petitioner to submit storm pond maintenance agreement (if a pond is
necessary) prior to issuance of building permit.
6) Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance
of building permit.
7) Petitioner to provide landscaped hedges along the west and south side
property lines, when abutting a single family residence.
8) All lighting on the property shall be shielded and downcast and shall not
exceed 3 foot candles at the property line.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 26 of 31
10. Variance Request, VAR #05-08, by Target Corporation to Increase the
Allowable Total Square Footage of Free-Standing Signs from 80 Square
Feet to 330 Square Feet; and to Increase the Square Footage of the East
(Front of Store) Wall Signage from 359 Square Feet to 744 Square Feet,
Generally Located at 755 — 53rd Avenue NE (Ward 1).
Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, stated petitioner is seeking three variances; one for
height, one for total square footage, and increasing the wall signage on the front side of
the building. In regards to the height variance, the petitioner is proposing to place a
new pylon sign along I-694 near the northwest corner of the property. The variance
would allow the sign to be one foot taller than the current sign and 10 feet taller than
what the code allows for a total height of 35 feet. They are also requesting a variance
for the total amount of square footage for a free-standing sign from 80 square feet to
330 square feet. This is for two separate free-standing signs; one on their main
entrance off 53rd Avenue with a combined sign for Petco and Target. Petco is
relinquishing their right to have a free-standing sign. The purpose is to draw traffic to
this main entrance rather than through the access in front of the day care building to the
west.
Councilmember Wolfe asked how long the Target will be shut down.
Alice Roberts Davis, the real estate manager from Target for this project, stated
historically the store is shut down for 10 months but that has yet to be determined for
this store.
Ms. Jones stated the sign along I-694 is 213 square feet. As far as the wall signage,
they're looking to increase the square footage on the east side of the building, the front
of the store, from 359 square feet to 744 square feet. There will be no wall signage on
the south side of the store. The only signage on the north side of the building is a
10 x 10 foot Target symbol. The petitioner is willing to stipulate that this would be the
limits of their signage. The City's sign code allows a total square footage of 80 square
feet per development and free-standing signs to be no more than 25 feet above the
finished grade, and limits wall signage to 15 times the square foot of the building.
Ms. Jones explained that for sign variances, there are four requirements staff reviews:
- Are there exceptional circumstances? Target is arguing that the odd shape of
the north property line and the depressed elevation of their site in relation to
1-694 and Hwy 65 are unique to their site.
- That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity
and district but which is denied the property in question. Other property in the
vicinity of 1-694 has been granted similar sign variances in similar situations
for all three sign variances requested.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 27 of 31
That the strict application would constitute an unnecessary hardship. Target
argues that strict application of the sign code would not provide signage that
would be visible enough to allow 1-694 drivers to adequately identify their
property and exit safely in time from the freeway.
- That the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the
public health, safety or general welfare, or detrimental to the property in the
vicinity or district in which the property is located. A larger entry monument
sign at the Target property located on the east entrance will be important on
this site to direct a majority of the traffic into the site and away from Monroe
Street which is shared by the daycare and a/so will serve as the delivery
entrance for both Target and Petco. Larger signage will not be detrimental to
surrounding commercial property. The taller pylon sign along the freeway
may have an impact on nearby residential properties; however, the lighting
from the sign would be no more distracting than the headlights of freeway
traffic which is at an even higher elevation. Target makes a valid point that
placement of the 1-694 pylon sign at a higher elevation c/ose to the west
property line will offer the best notification to drivers that they need to exit the
freeway at Central Avenue.
Ms. Jones stated staff recommends approval of all three variances as the petitioner has
demonstrated statutory defined hardship and there are several comparable variances
that have been granted over recent years for similar situations.
If approved, staff recommends that the following stipulations be attached:
1) All existing signs located on the property shall be removed upon demolition of
the buildings.
2) Any existing sign variances will be null and void with approval of this new
variance(s).
3) The minimum height from the bottom of the new pylon sign and the finished
ground grade will be ten feet or the sign will be placed at least 25' back from
all property lines.
4) No additional free-standing signs shall be allowed on this site besides the two
approved.
5) This variance shall remain in effect unless any of the following occur:
a. The sign is altered in any way, except for routine maintenance and change
of inessages which makes the sign less in compliance with requirements.
b. The supporting structure of the sign is replaced or remodeled.
c. The face of the sign is replaced or remodeled.
d. The sign becomes dilapidated or damaged and the cost of bringing it into
compliance is more than 50% of the value of the sign, at which time all of
the sign and its structure shall be removed.
e. Notwithstanding subparagraph (a) above, upon the change of the name of
the business being displayed on the sign.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 28 of 31
Councilmember Billings requested a stipulation be added. "A recordable covenant to
the benefit of the City prohibiting free-standing signage on Lot 2, Block 1 of the parcel.
The Petco site." He explained that since Petco is giving up their free-standing pylon
sign, if someone else owns the property at some point in the future they need to know
that they are not going to be able to get a free-standing pylon on that site.
Mr. Wiebe, Westwood Professional Services, stated there is a sign at the east entrance
off 53rd Avenue with the Petco name.
Ms. Davis stated this can be incorporated into the operating agreement which is a
recorded document.
Councilmember Billings stated his concern is not with Petco but with a possible future
owner.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked for clarification of the sign square footage.
Ms. Jones stated the sign along I-694 is 213 square feet; and along 53rd Avenue, it is
117 square feet. The total of the wall signage along the front of the building is 744. The
logo on the north side of the building is 10' x 10'.
Mr. Wiebe stated the total allowable square footage for all three wall sings is over 900
square feet.
Mr. Grandstrand stated his main concern is the location of the sign along I-694.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to add the
following stipulations:
6) No additional future signage shall be permitted on any building face beyond
that which is approved by this variance action.
7) Adequate assurance that recordable prohibition of free-standing signage will
exist on Lot 2.
Mayor Lund asked if the petitioner accepted the two additional stipulations.
Mr. Wiebe responded affirmatively.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
TO APPROVE THE TWO ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
TO APPROVE VARIANCE REQUEST, VAR #05-08, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 29 of 31
11. Variance Request, VAR #05-09, by Target Corporation to Decrease the
Front Yard Setback on a Commercial Building from 80 Square Feet to 24
Square Feet Generally Located at 755 - 53rd Avenue NE (Ward 1).
Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, explained this is a 56-foot variance from the required
front yard setback for a building in the C-3 district. The site plan is designed to remove
the parking area in the southwest corner of the Target-Petco site and construct a new
15,260 square foot building for Petco. There will be new landscaping included, and the
parking area will be screened from 53rd Avenue by the building itself and the new
landscaping. There will also be a newly designed access to the Target-Petco site
immediately east of the new Petco building. Moving the Petco building closer to 53rd
Avenue allows better configuration of the parking behind the building rather than along
53rd Avenue. Section 205.15 of the City Code states the required front yard setback
would be 80 feet. In reviewing variance requests, staff looks at three questions:
Is the public policy being served? The Comprehensive Plan states that
existing commercial sites should be targeted for aesthetic and land use
efficiency improvements.
Is there a unique circumstance or hardship? Petco's hardship statement
reads as follows: "The area between the 53`d Avenue right of way and the
building would be a parking lot if the site plan was developed according to the
speci�c section of the city code. When a parking lot abuts a city street,
landscape screening is required between the right-of-way and the parking lot.
As a result of a jet fuel gas line along the west end of the site prohibiting any
significant plantings in the area between the street and the parking lot, we are
unable to meet the code requirement. The setback would create a hardship
to Petco in that it would not allow for reasonab/e use of the property. In order
to comply with the parking requirements for the new Petco facility and create
a viable visual perspective of the building, we need to locate the building
closer to 53`d Avenue."
Can conditions be imposed to protect adjacent properties? Stipulations were
attached and approved by the Appeals Commission at their June 8 meeting.
Ms. Jones stated staff concurs with the Appeals Commission recommendation for
approval as the petitioner has a statutory defined hardship and the proposal meets
redevelopment principals in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends the following
five stipulations:
1) The petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction.
2) The petitioner shall create a four sided building (architecturally to be reviewed
and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permit).
3) The petitioner shall work with Metro Transit to relocate the existing bus stop
to the area immediately south of the Petco building.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 30 of 31
4) The petitioner shall provide a pedestrian connection to the existing sidewalk
along 53rd Avenue NE.
5) The petitioner shall provide green space to the south of the proposed Petco
building.
Ms. Jones reviewed the site plan for the new Petco building. She explained that they
have created a fake front for the side of the building facing 53rd Avenue, with the actual
entrance located on the northeast corner of the building.
Mayor Lund questioned the truck traffic pattern for this new building.
Mr. Wiebe, Westwood Professional Services, explained the access will be the same as
for the Super Target; accessing via Monroe Street and exiting to the east of the building.
Councilmember Billings questioned the time frame for construction.
Alice Roberts Davis, real estate manager for Target, stated they would like to begin
construction mid-July with completion by mid-November and demolition of the existing
Petco and Target building to begin in January.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to approve
Variance Request, VAR #05-09, with the following five stipulations.
1) The petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction.
2) The petitioner shall create a four sided building (architecturally to be reviewed
and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permit).
3) The petitioner shall work with Metro Transit to relocate the existing bus stop to
the area immediately south of the Petco building.
4) The petitioner shall provide a pedestrian connection to the existing sidewalk
along 53rd Avenue NE.
5) The petitioner shall provide green space to the south of the proposed Petco
building.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
12. Informal Status Reports.
Councilmember Barnette said the Fridley Safety Camp for elementary school children
will be held at Commons Park the next two days.
ADJOURN:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to adjourn.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2005 Paqe 31 of 31
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:05 AM.
Respectfully submitted by,
Rebecca Brazys Scott J. Lund
Recording Secretary Mayor
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF FRIDLEY
JULY 11, 2005
The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at
7:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Lund led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund
Councilmember-at-Large Barnette
Councilmember Billings
Councilmember Wolfe
Councilmember Bolkcom
OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager
Fritz Knaak, City Attorney
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Richard Pribyl, Finance Director
Julie Jones, Planning Director
Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director
PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA
NEW BUSINESS:
1. First Reading of an Ordinance Recodifying the Fridley City Code by
Amending Appendix F to Provide for the Adjustment of Salaries for the
Mayor and Councilmembers in Accordance with Section 207 of the Charter
of the City of Fridley.
Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated the legislation before Council provides for a 3% salary
increase for the Mayor and Council effective January 1, 2006. The last salary increase
for the Mayor and Council was effective in 2003. Council's salaries are currently well
below the median salary for Council members and Mayors in the metropolitan area, and
had the consumer price index been used in the last ten years, those salaries would be
much higher than they are now. Staff recommends Councils approval.
THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON
THE REGULAR AGENDA.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 2
2. Resolution Ordering Preliminary Plans, Specifications and Estimates of the
Costs Thereof: Neighborhood Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2005-3.
Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated this legislation initiates the improvements to 73'/
Avenue that were directed by Council in conjunction with the Van Auken plat. These
include the construction of the Van Auken cul-de-sac, the removal of the existing cul-de-
sac and the replacement of bituminous curbing on 73'/ Avenue with concrete curbing.
The improvements also include the reconstruction of the street that serves as the
existing cul-de-sac. Mr. Van Auken will be assessed for the new cul-de-sac. The four
property owners whose properties abut the existing cul-de-sac will be assessed for the
concrete curbing and gutter in the area currently occupied by the cul-de-sac. Staff
recommends Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-32.
3. Approve School Resource Officer Service Agreement between the City of
Fridley and Fridley School District No. 14.
Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated the contract before Council is the same except for the
compensation provisions. The compensation for one-half of the salaries and benefits
for two police officers for the nine-month school year is $60,778.98, an increase of
$7,340.20. During this time, the officers will serve as School Resources Officers in the
Fridley Middle School and Fridley High School. The agreement is for the 2005-2006
school year that began on July 1, 2005. Staff recommends Council's approval.
APPROVED.
4. Motion to Authorize Staff to Inform Time Warner Cable of the Need for a
Public Hearing to be Held on August 8, 2005, to Consider the Proposed
Transfer of Control of the Cable Television Franchise from Time Warner
Cable to Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, and to Determine Whether
the Proposed Transfer may have an Adverse Effect on Cable Television
Subscribers.
Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated that on June 15, 2005, the City received FCC Form
394 which represents Time Warner's application seeking consent for their transfer of
control to Comcast. Legal counsel advises that the City has two choices; to approve the
transfer without a public hearing by July 15, 2005, or hold a public hearing followed by a
decision on the transfer by October 15, 2005. Staff recommends that a public hearing
be held August 8, 2005.
APPROVED.
5. Claims (122236 — 122444).
APPROVED.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 3
6. Licenses.
APPROVED.
7. Estimates.
APPROVED.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to approve
the consent agenda, with the removal of Item 1.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to approve
the agenda with the addition of Item 1.
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
Joan Olson, 6320 VanBuren Street, referred to a recent article that Springbrook Nature
Center is looking for a$5 million improvement so they can hold special events. She
pointed out that just last year, Springbrook claimed to desperately need funding and
now they are asking for a significant financial commitment. She was also concerned
about the cost of maintaining the proposed improvements.
Councilmember Barnette asked Ms. Olson to contact him to discuss this issue further.
Don Anderson, 7304 West Circle, complained about fireworks going off in the middle of
the night on Baker Street.
Pete Eisenzimmer, 6535 Oakley Drive, stated at a previous Council meeting he
requested some assistance from the City with drainage problems in his back yard, but
he has not yet heard from any City staff inember. He also spoke in opposition to the
Springbrook Nature Center request for additional funding.
Mayor Lund said the Public Works Director would contact him.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 4
OLD BUSINESS:
8. Second Reading of an Ordinance Approving a Rezoning, ZOA #05-02, from
C-1, 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 (by Family Lifestyle Development
Corporation) (Ward 2).
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated this is the fourth time this item
has been discussed, so he briefly reviewed the proposal. This project is located in the
southeast quadrant of Mississippi Street and Old Central. What are proposed are a 70-
unit, owner-occupied senior condominium building as well as limited commercial
opportunity on the first level. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on
June 1. On June 13, Council held a public hearing and heard additional testimony. The
first reading was held at their June 27 meeting. Staff recommends approval of the
second reading of this ordinance.
Mayor Lund referred to Stipulations 17 and 18
Mr. Knaak reviewed his recommendation to add Stipulation 24 as follows: "Developer
shall provide the necessary governing association documents that will not permit more
than 5% of the units to be rented at any one time."
After some discussion, Mr. Knaak also proposed the following be added to Stipulation
18 after the word "seniors": (meaning persons 55 years or older).
Councilmember Barnette questioned if a spouse under age 55 and children of a
senior would be permitted to reside in this building.
Mr. Knaak responded that with the language proposed, no one under 55 could reside in
the building.
Councilmember Billings commented that the building is restricted to seniors.
Mayor Lund questioned if Council is getting involved in civil liberties.
Mr. Knaak stated Council can impose reasonable conditions on these kinds of
developments.
Councilmember Wolfe asked why fire access to the back of this proposed building was
required last year but not this year.
Mr. Hickok said the Fire Marshal has reviewed this proposal and the International Fire
Code, much more is known about the fire protection plans for this project, and it was
determined they do not need to access the east side of the building as a result of
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 5
sprinklering and access to all other sides of the building. There are a number of
differences with this plan also. The project does not go all the way to 64t" Avenue, the
building is situated differently on the property, the building is sprinklered through the
rafters, and designed access is allowed to three of the four sides.
Pete Eisenzimmer, 6535 Oakley Drive, questioned why the Council denied this
proposal last year and approved it this year. He also stated the Planning Commission
should act themselves rather than passing a development on to Council and expecting
Council to make all the determinations.
Pam Reynolds, 1241 Norton Avenue, stated in 2004 it took a four-fifths vote to deny
the original proposal from this petitioner. The statute changed in 2001 to require a
three-fifths vote.
Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated the statute overrides provisions of the City Code that
might be contrary and the statute does provide for a three-fifths vote. That change in
the law was more recent than 2001. The issue did not present itself until quite recently
because most votes are unanimous. This should be brought to the attention of the
Charter Commission for change.
MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to waive the
second reading and deny the ordinance for the same reasons as stated last time.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING AYE AND MAYOR
LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND
COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION FAILED TO CARRY ON A FOUR TO ONE VOTE.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to waive
the second reading and adopt the ordinance and 23 stipulations on second reading and
order publication.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to
amend the stipulations as follows: Add Stipulation 24 to read "The petitioner shall
provide that the necessary governing association document will not permit more than
5% of the units to be rented at any one time." Revise Stipulation 18 as follows: After
the word "seniors", insert "55 years or older."
Councilmember Billings requested the motion be split so that each amendment could
be voted on separately.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
TO ADD STIPULATION 24 CARRIED UNAMINOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 6
Councilmember Billings was concerned that adding the words "55 years or older" to
Stipulation 18 may create problems; such as the spouse of a resident being under age
55 or a younger live-in nurse for a qualified resident. He believed the owners'
association would make adequate regulations to cover this issue.
John DeMello, petitioner, suggested the stipulation require that the principal owner of
the condominium be 55 and older.
Mr. Knaak stated if Council were to limit this to the principal owner, the principal owner
would have to be defined. He believed the concept of senior housing is widely
understood and if Council allows for some flexibility, they might be able to avoid these
kinds of questions which could limit the marketability of the units.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. DeMello if Stipulation 24 is acceptable.
Mr. DeMello responded affirmatively.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION TO AMEND STIPULATION 18 ADDING THE WORDS "55 YEARS OR
OLDER" FAILED TO CARRY ON A UNANIMOUS VOTE.
Mayor Lund commented that after reviewing the meeting minutes, he believes the
developer has met the burden of proof. He realized this is not a perfect situation for the
residents.
Councilmember Wolfe believed that all of the eleven reasons for the original denial are
still there. The new project looked no different. He also referred to the statement in the
Comprehensive Plan that if redevelopment changes the character of a neighborhood, it
should not be allowed. He stated his obligation is to his constituents and that is how he
will vote.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE,
COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING AYE
AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 1204 WITH THE FOLLOWING 24
STIPULATIONS CARRIED ON A FOUR TO ONE VOTE.
1. Property to be developed in accordance with Master Plan — Landscape &
Grading Plan MP-1.0 and Master Plan — Utility & Grading Plan MP-2.0 dated
June 22, 2005.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with the 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.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 7
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 District's 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 required NPDES permit and Rice Creek Watershed District
perm its.
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 205.14.6G(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 foot).
17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the building's 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 the 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 sharing the cost of any traffic
improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic specifically 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 from the site for pedestrian
connections at the north and west sides of property.
24. The Petitioner shall provide that the necessary governing association document
will not permit more than 5% of the units to be rented at any one time.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 8
9. Variance Request, VAR #05-10, by United Defense to Allow Two Free-
Standing Signs for a Total of 160 Square Feet, Generally Located at 4800
East River Road NE (Ward 3).
Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, explained that the petitioner, United Defense, was
recently acquired by BAE Systems. The petitioner is seeking a variance to increase the
size and number of allowable free-standing signs on their property from 80 to 160
square feet. The subject property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, and is surrounded by
M-2 zoning to the north, south and east and park property to the west. Businesses
have existed on this property since 1940 with several alterations over the years. There
is one access point on the north side of the property on 61 St Way and three access
points on East River Road. The petitioner was issued a sign permit on this property in
1985 for a 144 square foot, free-standing sign on the west side of East River Road. The
petitioner has agreed to remove that sign because it is non-conforming according to the
current sign code requirements. Permits have also been issued recently for one 80
square foot, free-standing sign at the north entrance and a 126 square foot wall sign
and a 24 square foot identification sign at the north East River Road entrance.
Ms. Jones explained the reason for changing all the signage is the recent acquisition of
this company by BAE. Sign code allows for only one free-standing sign per street
frontage and the petitioner is requesting two on East River Road. The sign code also
allows for a maximum of 80 square feet of free-standing signage per development. All
signs must be installed on the owner's property which is why the existing sign on the
west side of East River Road will be removed, as that property was sold to Anoka
County Parks. Similar variances approved by the City include Cummins Power
Generation, Bachman's, University Business Center and Home Value.
Ms. Jones said petitioner's hardship statement says: "This 135 acre property far
exceeds the norm in size and frontage for property in the City of Fridley. The major
entrances to the property are greater than one-quarter mile apart on East River Road so
that signage for either one is not readily apparent from the other location. Additional
signage is necessary to safely route traffic."
Four code conditions are reviewed by staff, Ms. Jones explained, when considering a
sign variance:
1) Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property or to
the intended use that do not apply generally to other property in the same
vicinity and district.
Petitioner states that the mere size of their property places them in a unique
situation. One entrance is one-quarter mile apart from the other, and it is
critical that truck deliveries do not get to the wrong entrance.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 9
2) That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity
and district, but which is denied the property in question.
Other property on similar high traffic roadways in the City has been granted
similar sign variances in similar situations for both of the sign variances
requested.
3) That the strict application would constitute an unnecessary hardship.
United Defense states that strict application of the sign code would not
provide signage that would be visible enough to allow safe identification for
the approximately 200 non-employee visitors they typically have to the site
daily; especially considering the speed on East River Road.
4) That the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the
public health, safety or general welfare, or detrimental to the property in the
vicinity or district in which the property is located.
Due to the large sca/e of the United Defense site, it is unlikely that larger than
normal free-standing signs will create any detriment to the businesses to the
north and south.
Ms. Jones said staff recommends approval of this variance request because the
petitioner has a demonstrated hardship and similar variance requests have been
granted to businesses in the past. If approved, staff recommends five stipulations.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if petitioner accepts the stipulations recommended by
staff. She also asked for an explanation as to why different signage is required for the
entrances.
Jeff Van Keuren, representing BAE Systems, stated they have no objections to the
stipulations. He explained their main concern is safety for those accessing their
property. Truck traffic is only allowed to enter at the north access point, so they have to
channel all the truck traffic to that entrance. They receive shipments from all over the
country and many of the truck drivers have no idea how to access the property. Also,
visitors can enter from either the north or south entrances, but signage is necessary to
direct them to the registration area. Another concern is the speed on East River Road
which makes adequate signage important so that it can be read in sufficient time to slow
down and pull into the correct entrance.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Barnette, to
approve Variance Request, VAR #05-10, by United Defense with the following five
stipulations:
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 10
1) The existing free standing sign on the west side of East River Road be
removed at the same time or before the new south entrance sign is installed.
2) Any existing sign variances will be null and void with approval of this new
variance(s).
3) The minimum height from the bottom of the new free standing sign and the
finished ground grade will be ten feet or the sign will be placed at least 25 feet
back from all property lines.
4) No addition free standing signs shall be allowed on this site besides the two
approved with the exception of information / directional signs 4 square feet in
total size or smaller on the site.
5) This variance shall remain in effect unless any of the following occur:
a. The sign is altered in any way, except for routine maintenance and change
of inessages which makes the sign less in compliance with requirements.
b. The supporting structure of the sign is replaced or remodeled.
c. The face of the sign is replaced or remodeled.
d. The sign becomes dilapidated or damaged and the cost of bringing it into
compliance is more than 50% of the value of the sign, at which time all of
the sign and its structure shall be removed.
e. Notwithstanding subparagraph (a) above, upon the change of the name of
the business being displayed on the sign.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. Variance Request, VAR #05-11, by The Velmeir Companies on Behalf of
CVS Pharmacies to Reduce the Rear Yard Setback from 40 Feet to 26 Feet
to Allow the Construction of a CVS Pharmacy, and to Decrease the
Required Parking from 86 Stalls to 75 Stalls, Generally Located at 5696
University Avenue NE (Ward 3).
Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, stated The Velmeir Companies, on behalf of CVS
Pharmacy, is seeking a variance to decrease the rear yard setback from 40 to 26 feet at
5696 University Avenue NE, the former Cattle Company Restaurant site, and to
decrease the required parking from 86 stalls to 75 stalls. The petitioner plans to
develop a 12,900 square foot CVS Pharmacy and convenience store in this C-3 zoning.
Also included will be a drive-through prescription window. The surrounding property to
the west is zoned C-3; the property to the north and east is zoned C-2 and I-694 is
located to the south. In 1983 ,the property was created as a plot of its own, separate
from Holiday Foods. There has been no setback or parking variances granted to this
property in the past. The Cattle Company restaurant opened in 1983 and closed in
2004. The building is currently vacant, but the parking lot is being used informally as a
park-and-ride lot for the bus stop at the corner. Pharmacies and convenience stores
are permitted in the C-3 district. Staff was not able to find a rear yard setback in the C-3
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 11
zoning, but they did find similar cases; Bona Brothers at 5333 University received a 25
foot rear yard setback variance to residential property in 1989; an industrial building at
7500 Commerce Lane received a variance in 1998 to reduce the rear yard setback from
25 feet to 8 feet; and Banfill Crossing, a senior apartment building on University
Avenue, received a rear yard setback variance from 25 feet to 15 feet in 1996.
As far as previous parking variances, Ms. Jones stated Target Superstore received a
variance at the last Council meeting for 54% of the required parking while this petitioner
is 87% of the code requirement. The City Code does allow a reduction in the parking
stalls when the provisions of space required for parking stalls would be an unnecessary
hardship. The City Code also states that adequate open space should be provided to
satisfy the total number of required parking spaces. The parking ratio is one for 150
square feet of building area and the petitioner is seeking a variance for reduction of 11
parking stalls with no proof of parking proposed.
Ms. Jones explained when reviewing such variance requests, staff considers if the
public policy is being served, if there is a hardship, and if stipulations are needed to
protect adjacent properties. As to public policy, the Comprehensive Plan states that
existing commercial sites should be targeted for aesthetic improvements and land use
efficiency improvements which this proposal will do. Similar variances have been
approved in the past and the proposed variance will not negatively impact surrounding
properties. As to hardship, the petitioner states that "Due to the fact that the site was
originally designed for a former use... there are a number of practical difficulties... of the
property that cause undue hardship in the strict application of the zoning ordinance."
Staff acknowledges that it is difficult to redevelop properties designed for a different use.
It should be noted that when the petitioner initially met with staff, they were requesting
several variances to develop this site, but they revised their plans and eliminated all the
variances except the rear yard and parking variances. There is a lot of unused parking
in the surrounding commercial sites, so this parking variance is not expected to impact
surrounding properties. The Appeals Commission held a public hearing on this request
on June 22 and unanimously recommended approval. Staff concurs with the Appeals
Commission recommendation noting that this proposal meets the redevelopment
principals of the Comprehensive Plan; the petitioner has shown a statutory defined
hardship; all similar setback variances have been approved in the past; and a similar
parking variance has recently been approved.
Ms. Jones stated staff recommends approval with seven stipulations which she
outlined.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked what impact would result if the rear yard setback and
parking variances are not approved. She also asked how the size of this building
compares to Walgreen's and whether or not there have been any problems with the
Walgreen's site, particularly parking.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 12
Ms. Jones stated at the public hearing there was a great deal of comparison between
Walgreen's and this petition. The CVS building is smaller than the Walgreen's store
There is unused parking at the Walgreen's site.
Councilmember Bolkcom questioned if having the drive-through prescription window
would reduce the parking spaces required. She also asked if there is anything that can
be done to eliminate the park-and-ride parking on these sites.
Ms. Jones stated staff suggested this petitioner consider the same efforts Walgreen's
has made to control park-and-ride, such as label the spaces closest to their building as
30 minute parking only.
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated without the rear yard setback
variance, the building would have to be reduced 1,650 square feet to be the right
building footprint size. The drive-through pharmacy also impacts the rear yard.
Jim LaValle, representing The Velmeir Companies, stated there would be three to four
cars less per hour because of the drive-through window, but that varies. The CVS
Pharmacy hours of operation will be from 8:00 a.m. to midnight with the drive-through
window hours varying slightly. They intend to cooperate with staff as well as the transit
authority to control park-and-ride parking and provide a pedestrian crossing to the
corner and enhancements to the bus shelter. He also stated they have no objections to
the stipulations recommended by staff. He then reviewed the traffic pattern for the
drive-through window.
Mayor Lund asked if proof of parking is included in this proposal.
Ms. Jones stated staff discussed proof of parking at the public hearing and with the
petitioner and they came to the conclusion that there is a lot of unused parking in the
surrounding area and it makes more sense for them to have reciprocal parking
arrangements with adjoining properties rather than proof of parking.
Mr. LaVelle stated previous traffic studies show the optimum number of parking
required is 65 and they have proposed 75. They believe there is ample parking for their
customers.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to approve
Variance Request, VAR #05-11, with the following seven stipulations:
1) Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction.
2) City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior
to issuance of building permits.
3) Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance
of building permit.
4) Petitioner to submit storm pond maintenance agreement (if a pond is
necessary) prior to issuance of a building permit.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 13
5) Petitioner to meet all building, fire, and ADA requirements.
6) Petitioner shall create a four-sided building (architecturally to be reviewed
and approved by staff prior to issuance of building permit).
7) Petitioner shall provide a pedestrian connection to the existing sidewalk
along University Avenue NE and 57t" Avenue NE.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
11. Award Design Contract to Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates for
the Locke Park Filter Plant Improvement Project No. 364.
Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, stated Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates
has done a lot of work for the City in the past, so they are familiar with the City's water
system. The Locke Park Filter Plant is located on the University Avenue East Service
Drive immediately south of Columbia Arena. Repairs to the brick work and farade and
replacement of the roof are listed in the City's capital improvement plan. He reviewed
photographs of the existing building pointing out the areas that need attention.
$200,000 was the original budget estimate, and funding for this project was included in
the recent sale of bonds from the Water Enterprise Fund. BRAA has prepared a
preliminary design report which was included in Council's packet. Four different options
were considered and after review, staff has decided to proceed with Option 2 which is
replacing the existing pre-cast wall panels with a new EIFS system to match profile and
color of existing pre-cast concrete wall panels, cleaning up the building and fixing the
roof. The cost estimate for this is $97,500. They have submitted a proposal for design
work at $10,100 plus reimbursables. Staff is recommending the award of this project.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to award
the design contract for the Locke Park Filter Plant Improvement Project No. 364 to
Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates, not to exceed a fee of $11,225.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
12. Motion to Approve the Creation of a Rain Garden Infiltration Basin in Jay
Park , Generally Located at 6520 Second Street NE (Ward 3).
Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, stated this is part of the City's current street
reconstruction project. Staff has been working with the Rice Creek Watershed District
regarding storm water for this region. As a result of that and some neighborhood input,
staff has come up with a proposal to put an infiltration basin in the northwest corner of
Jay Park. The Rice Creek Watershed District is requiring the City to add storm water
improvements to this project as a part of their permit approval. Using Jay Park is the
most economical solution to meet the requirements. What is being proposed is a rain
garden infiltration basin which will intercept one of the City's storm sewer systems
through that area, cutting it off, and creating a place where a lot of that water can pond
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 14
and infiltrate back into the ground rather than flowing directly into Rice Creek. The soils
in that area are very conducive to this. Even in a large storm event, they do not expect
to see water sitting in the pond area for more than a day. A neighborhood meeting was
held on June 7 with nearly total support of this project. Conceptual drawings were
mailed to the entire neighborhood with a request for comments or questions as well as
the option of having rain gardens installed in front of their homes with cost-sharing by
the City and the Rice Creek Watershed District. He spoke with the District today and
they had received six requests to do that with a seventh pending. It has to be evaluated
as to how many of the sites are viable but the decision was the City would take care of
the mass grading and curb changes which are essentially no-cost items, and the
homeowners could cost-share with the District for the plantings. This was the Rice
Creek Watershed District's landscape architect concept for the infiltration basin. They
added in the proposed trail from the hedges, benches and various amenities that can be
added to the project. He reviewed pictures of existing rain gardens in other areas.
Small retaining walls may be placed in the Jay Park ponding area just to add some
shade to it rather than having a rectangular slope. They had to move the pond site
further north than originally shown to the neighborhood because of an existing sanitary
sewer main that cuts underneath the park.
Mr. Haukaas said the Parks & Recreation Commission reviewed this proposal at a
special meeting on June 25. They indicated they could not support it because of the
loss of green play space and the need for more proof that the neighborhood supported
the concept. After that meeting, Mr. Haukaas sent another letter to the entire
neighborhood advising them of the Parks & Recreation Commission's decision and
explaining that it would be an item on tonight's Council agenda. He received several
calls in support and two in opposition. If this project is approved, the Parks Division
would be responsible for the maintenance. This proposed pond will not be quite as
deep and not as sharply sloped as other such ponds. They do not anticipate the pond
will require a lot of maintenance and installation of the pond will mean less mowing area
reducing maintenance to once a month rather than once a week. The Sewer Division
will inspect the pond and, as necessary, will remove accumulated sediment from the
bottom of the pond. As this is the most economical solution staff has found to meet the
Rice Creek Watershed District's requirements and the neighborhood has been fully
informed all along, staff recommends Council's approval.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked how much further north the pond will be located.
Mr. Haukaas responded it will be 20 to 30 feet north. It has a very gentle slope,
dropping one foot every eight feet. He also explained that since they are working on a
street reconstruction project in the area of Jay Park, they will have to take out so much
dirt to rebuild the road base that to take out a scoop here and there for an additional rain
garden requested by a resident is not an issue.
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that the Parks & Recreation members were
concerned about green space in this park.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 15
Mr. Haukaas stated there was originally a small ball field which has not been used in
many years. Berms were put in for a hockey rink but that also has not been used.
Dr. Burns, City Manager, commented that the City has differed with the Rice Creek
Watershed District over their requirement for infiltration ponds for projects that
encompass existing streets. To some extent, this is a concession to them and their
right to require infiltration ponds. He questioned what this concession in 2005 would
mean for costs in 2006.
Mr. Haukaas stated he walked the entire 2006 project today with the Rice Creek
Watershed District engineer looking for opportunities for storm water improvements and
for a lot of it, there is no storm sewer whatsoever. If the City were to get any, it would
have to be through voluntary residents having rain gardens in front of their homes. A lot
of the streets are around Meadowlands Park, so they would not necessarily have to
have a City-maintained rain garden, although that is a possibility. They should be able
to make use of the existing pond in that area.
Councilmember Barnette questioned if the storm water system for the Jay Park area
empties into Locke Lake.
Mr. Haukaas responded it all deposits into Locke Lake, which is essentially a storm
water pond, but the impact will be negligible as there will be a reduction in flow.
Councilmember Wolfe stated he does not have a problem with this project but
questioned why the City is doing individual rain gardens.
Mr. Haukaas responded that the individual rain gardens are purely voluntary with the
only expense to the City being an extra yard of excavation here and there. The City has
agreed to do the main excavation and changes to the curb. All the other costs such
plantings and retaining walls would be cost-shared between the resident and the
Watershed District. The individual homeowners will be responsible for maintenance of
their rain gardens.
Pete Eisenzimmer, 6535 Oakley Drive, stated this project is going to end up the same
as Meadowland Parks--all the water from the street running down to the pond and into
the creek. He said the City does not any more parks. He questioned the cost of this
park.
Mayor Lund explained Jay Park is an existing park and all that is being addressed is
the need to collect storm water run-off for Rice Creek Watershed District. In fact, Rice
Creek Watershed District is requiring the City to do something about the run-off. This is
a much more viable and less expensive plan.
Mr. Haukaas explained one of the original plans to meet Rice Creek Watershed
District's full requirements was to do some under the street re-infiltration pipes and
some treatment structures which would have cost in excess of $150,000. Staff started
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 16
negotiating with Rice Creek Watershed District and looking at other options. The total
storm water improvements with this proposal are less than $60,000.
Bruce Lundberg, 230 Rice Creek Terrace, stated he and his wife have lived at this
location for 32 years and he can count on one hand the number of times he has seen
any children playing on the baseball field in Jay Park. He supported the proposal by
City staff and believed it to be the best solution for their area. The proposed location of
the rain garden is basically a flat sand bed with weeds the City has to mow. By adding
the rain garden, it will enhance the look of the neighborhood and compliment some of
the existing landscaping. Unless the Parks & Recreation Commission has a specific
plan for the use of that space, the rain garden should go in.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to approve
the creation of a rain garden infiltration basin in Jay Park.
Councilmember Billings asked if the satellite dish shown in the picture of this area will
have to be relocated.
Mr. Hickok stated it is no longer on the site.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
1. First Reading of an Ordinance Recodifying the Fridley City Code by
Amending Appendix F to Provide for Adjustment of Salaries for the Mayor
and Councilmembers in accordance with Section 207 of the City Charter.
Pete Eisenzimmer, 6535 Oakley Drive, questioned why raises are being given when
the City claims to be in the middle of a hardship situation. He believed that such a raise
should be voted on by the public, not approved by the Council itself.
Dr. Burns explained that the salaries are being increased by 3% which is the same cost
of living adjustment being proposed for all City employees in 2006.
Mayor Lund commented that the members of the City Council have not had a raise
since 2003. The total amount of increase is only about $1,200.
Councilmember Billings pointed out that he began serving on the Council in 1998.
Between 1988 and now, the City Council has voted themselves an increase only six of
the 18 years and no increase in 12 of those years. The cost of living has gone up 75%
since 1987 and City Council salaries have only gone up about 37% in that time. Social
Security goes up every year. The City Charter sets the procedure for salary increases.
Joanne Zmuda, 6051 Fourth Street NE, stated Council's salary is not the issue. The
Council chose to be council members and if they do not like the salary, they do not have
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 17
to be a member. If the City Council was a business and acted on matters such as
development in single family neighborhoods, they would be fired.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom, to waive
the reading of the ordinance and approve the ordinance on first reading.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE,
COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING AYE
AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED ON A FOUR TO ONE VOTE.
13. Informal Status Reports
Councilmember Wolfe responded to comments during Open Forum regarding
Springbrook Nature Center funding. He explained that Council has made it clear that if
the Council approves projects for the Springbrook Nature Center, the Foundation will
have to raise enough money to be put in escrow to maintain the improvements.
Councilmember Billings stated the words "money in the bank" is not what was written
in the letter to the Foundation by Council. There has to be an adequate demonstrated,
reliable, source of funding for maintenance of improvements.
Jean Schwartz requested that e-mails submitted to Council on agenda items be
admitted into the public record.
Mayor Lund commented that e-mails sent to Council are a matter of public record.
Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated everything that goes on during Council meetings is
public and any correspondence received is public.
Mayor Lund said the items brought up in the e-mails were discussed during the public
hearing.
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, explained there is a list that the state
publishes about what is and is not to be retained as a permanent record. E-mails, once
a response has been given, may be deleted. He recommended that any persons
concerned about retention of records contact the City Clerk.
Councilmember Bolkcom also pointed out that there are official minutes of the
meetings as well as video tapes.
Councilmember Bolkcom reviewed a letter from a Logan Parkway resident
complimenting the work being done by the City and its staff in his neighborhood. In
response to questions presented at the last Council meeting, she asked Dr. Burns to
comment on a letter he received regarding Columbia Arena.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 11, 2005 PAGE 18
Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission has sent
out letters to business owners asking whether or not they would be interested in funding
the repairs needed for Columbia Arena. To date, there have been no responses.
Requests for qualifications were sent out to a number of developers for this site as a
potential redevelopment site and they received seven responses. Whatever proposal is
made for this property would have to come before the City.
ADJOURN
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to adjourn.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:51 PM.
Respectfully submitted by,
Rebecca Brazys Scott J. Lund
Recording Secretary Mayor
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
T�:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
William W. Burns, City Manager
Deborah K. Dahl, Human Resources Director
July 21, 2005
2006 Council Salaries
Attached for second reading is an ordinance to increase Council salaries by three percent (3%)
effective January 1, 2006. The ordinance was prepared pursuant to Chapter 2.07 of the Fridley
City Charter. The annual salaries for the Mayor and Councilmembers during 2006 shall be as
follows:
Mayor: $ 9,926.07
Councilmember-at-Large: $ 8,153.16
Councilmember, Ward I: $ 7,208.17
Councilmember, Ward II: $ 7,208.17
Councilmember, Ward III: $ 7,208.17
Staff recommends Council's approval of the second reading of this ordinance.
Attachment
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE BY
AMENDING APPENDIX F TO PROVIDE FOR THE ADJUSTMENT
OF SALARIES FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.07 OF THE CHARTER OF THE
CITY OF FRIDLEY
The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows:
The annual salaries for the Mayor and Councilmembers during 2006 and subsequent years shall be as
follows:
Mayor
Councilmember-at-Large
Councilmember, Ward I
Councilmember, Ward II
Councilmember, Ward III
$9,926.07
$8,153.16
$7,208.17
$7,208.17
$7,208.17
In addition, the Mayor and Councilmembers shall be entitled to the same benefits enjoyed by full-time
authorized employees of the City of Fridley.
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
First Reading: July 11, 2005
Second Reading:
Publication:
DRAFT
CITY OF FRIDLEY
PLANNING COMMISSION
J U LY 6, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Kondrick called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:30
p.m.
ROLL CALL
Members present:
Members absent:
Others present:
Barbara Johns
Larry Kuechle
David Kondrick
Dean Saba
Diane Savage
Leroy Oquist
Brad Dunham
Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator
Rebecca Brazys, Recording Secretary
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — June 15, 2005
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Kuechle to approve the
minutes of the June 15t" meeting as presented.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Consideration of a Special Use Permit SP #05-02 by Amtech Lighting for
Holiday Companies to allow a changeable electronic sign per Section
214.07 of the City Code, generally located at 200 57t" Av. NE.
MOTION by Commissioner Kuechle, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to open the
public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED
THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:34 PM.
Ms. Jones stated the petitioner would like to erect an automatic changeable sign for the
gasoline pricing portion of an existing free standing sign at the Holiday Store at 220 57t"
Av. NE. For clarification, this application is for only this location, not all the Holiday
stores in Fridley. The sign will be an LED type sign. This property is zoned C3,
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 2 of 12
General Shopping, so the commercial sign code applies. This station store was built in
1999 which is also the year they obtained a permit for the existing free standing sign.
The petitioner states that this type of LED sign is the new industry standard for gas
pricing. She reviewed a photo of the existing sign and explained the center portion will
be changed to an LED gas pricing sign. In staff's analysis, Ms. Jones stated they have
noted that an automatic changeable sign is permitted in the sign code with a special use
permit. There is a requirement that the sign message cannot change more often than
every 45 seconds. The existing sign is 77.5 square feet in size which complies with the
sign ordinance and it also meets the requirement that it can't be any closer than 50 feet
to a residential district. Staff recommends approval of SP #05-02 as it meets the
requirements of the sign code. Staff also recommends the following stipulations be
attached:
1) Petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to
installing any signage on site.
2) Message on LED section of sign cannot change more often than once every
45 seconds.
3) Message on LED section of sign can never flash or have motion that may
distract vehicular traffic in area.
Chairperson Kondrick asked if the message on the sign can be changed from gas
pricing to other promotions.
Scott Meister, Amtech Lighting representing Holiday Companies, responded the only
change on the new sign would be the actual gas pricing with no other messages
possible.
Commissioner Johns asked if Mr. Meister has any objections to the stipulations.
Mr. Meister responded he does not.
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to close the
public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED
THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:41 PM.
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Kuechle, to recommend
approval of SP #05-02 with the stipulations recommended by staff.
1) Petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to
installing any signage on site.
2) Message on LED section of sign cannot change more often than once every 45
seconds.
3) Message on LED section of sign can never flash or have motion that may distract
vehicular traffic in area.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 3 of 12
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. Consideration of a Master Plan Amendment, MP #05-01, by Yale Place
Associates, LLC, to increase the number of surFace parking spaces and
permit the construction of a raised parking structure, generally located
at 6499 University Avenue NE.
MOTION by Commissioner Kuechle, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to open the
public hearing.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED
THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:43 PM.
Ms. Jones stated the petitioner is requesting an amendment to its master plan to allow
for smaller, yet a greater number of parking spaces as well as a parking deck
expansion. Yale Place is proposing to buy the building next to City Hall, the former
Target Operations Center. The Target Operations Center property, City Hall and the
two medical buildings to the south are all part of a tax increment district which is why a
master plan was established for the entire area when it was originally developed. This
amendment would allow a smaller dimension but greater number of parking stalls
ranging from 8.5 to 9.5 feet in width rather than the 10 foot width required by code. The
second part of their request is to be permitted to build a parking deck on this site this
fall. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority will review this proposed amendment
at their July 7t" meeting. The reason for the various sizes is that the stalls closest to the
building will be the largest due to the anticipated greater turn-over of those stalls
throughout the day. Those stalls to be used by the employees, further away from the
building, will be 8.5 feet wide. The accessible stalls will not be reduced in size as
dictated by code. The narrow stall widths would allow for an additional 47 at-grade
parking stalls. In addition they're hoping to build a parking deck. There are two
different proposed plans, but they're looking for approval on the largest of the two
proposals. The final determination will depend upon the user of the building. One of
the proposed plans shows 104 additional stalls and the other shows 148 additional
stalls. The master plan amendment will show the largest option in case a new tenant
warrants the larger number of parking stalls.
Ms. Jones stated staff recommends approval of the request with the following
stipulations:
1) Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction.
2) The proposed parking structure additions shall be architecturally compatible
with the existing building and finished with complementary building materials
(as shown in petitioner's plan entitled Parking Structure Elevation — South).
3) Parking stalls to be reduced to 9.5 feet, 9.0 feet, and 8.5 feet in width
respectively , shall be striped as identified in proposed plan and remain
striped as such unless further modifications are made to the Master Plan after
appropriate Commission / Council action has been taken.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 4 of 12
4) No off-site parking will be permitted during construction of parking deck. All
necessary precautions and logistics planning must be done to assure public
safety and to assure demands will not be placed on adjacent parking facilities
or streets as a result of the parking deck construction.
Ms. Jones reviewed pictures of the property in question and the proposed lay-out and
explained there will be 34 - 9.5 foot wide parking stalls, 8 accessible parking stalls, 9
foot wide stalls along Mississippi and the remainder will be 8.5 feet wide.
Chairperson Kondrick questioned the difference in the two different parking ramp
proposals.
Ms. Jones stated one will contain 104 parking stalls and the other will have 148 stalls.
Commissioner Saba was concerned that the Planning Commission may be setting a
precedent for parking stall width if this request is approved.
Ms. Jones responded that this proposal is a little different than a variance request
typically submitted because it is a part of a master plan for the whole area. She
believed it would be difficult to argue that this would set a precedent for someone
coming in requesting a typical variance request. The projects with master plans are
always unique since the project is being reviewed as a whole.
Commissioner Saba explained he's concerned because the City has been very strict in
the past about issuing any kind of exception as the Appeals Commission has also been.
Ms. Jones explained there has been smaller width parking stalls approved, such as the
employee parking area for Medtronic.
Commissioner Kuechle asked if this would remain with the property and if there is a
tenant for the building requesting this much parking. He was concerned about "giving
something away we may not have to give away."
Ms. Jones stated it is her understanding that the master plan stays with the property
even if the property is sold. The petitioner has indicated they do have a possible lease
agreement with a tenant for a portion of the building which is why they have submitted
two different proposals. The final determination will depend upon what tenant or
tenants they end up with. They're in a difficult situation in that they feel they need the
additional parking to attract a tenant. The parking on site now was designed in a
customary fashion for Target and the way they used the building.
Commissioner Kuechle questioned the width of the drive aisle.
Ms. Jones offered to investigate this and respond.
Commissioner Johns asked if there's any way a retail use would go into this space.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 5 of 12
Ms. Jones stated it is her understanding that only an office use would be allowed on
this site.
Chairperson Kondrick asked if there should be an additional stipulation that if a retail
use does go into this site, the parking stalls should be of an adequate size.
Ms. Jones stated the issue of permitted uses should have already been addressed in
the master plan.
Commissioner Johns questioned if there will be any green space added since some
will be lost with the construction of the parking ramp.
Ms. Jones responded that to her knowledge there are no landscaping plans for this
location and any removed trees will not be replaced.
Commissioner Saba questioned how many parking spaces would be required if this
were a normal business office location.
Ms. Jones stated she would have to investigate that issue, but the Target operation did
not meet the parking stall requirements from the beginning.
Chairperson Kondrick questioned who will dictate the need for the ramp, the petitioner
or the City.
Ms. Jones stated the petitioner is initiating the request for additional parking; the City is
not requiring specific parking because we do not know who the tenant will be at this
point. The petitioner believes they need the additional parking to get a tenant into the
building.
Commissioner Johns questioned if all the stalls were 9.5 feet wide and there was only
the single surface, could the petitioner meet the parking requirements and she
questioned if the parking requirement is based on the square footage of the building.
Commissioner Kuechle commented they probably could, but another factor is the
number of employees on this site.
Commissioner Saba questioned if the impact of traffic on Mississippi has been
considered by staff.
Ms. Jones responded that she is not aware of any traffic concerns since it is a right in
right out only access onto Mississippi. When Target was using this site, most of the
people used the 5t" Street access rather than Mississippi.
Commissioner Kondrick commented that traffic leaving the site at quitting time could
be a concern on Mississippi and he believed staff should take a look at this.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 6 of 12
Mark McCary, president of Yale Place Associates (petitioner), stated he is aware of and
has no objections to the stipulations recommended by staff.
Commissioner Kuechle asked if the petitioner has had experience with the 8.5 foot
wide parking spaces. That is something the City doesn't normally have.
Mr. McCary responded as they have worked with parking lot consultants and looked at
the Metro wide community by community approach to parking widths, the standard now
is about an 8.5' parking stall. In municipalities where there is an extremely high demand
for parking, parking spaces actually get smaller. It's quite unusual to see 10 foot
parking stall widths - even in retail areas in the Metro. The building on this property has
been for sale for over four years and over that time there have been a number of
potential users, but they could not get beyond a preliminary analysis of the site
because, he believed, the principal "deal killer" has been the fact that the property is
under-parked by any measure of parking standards for conventional office use. This is a
very solid and well built office building, but nobody who would value this type of a
building design can make sense out of committing to it because of the under-parking
situation. A building with a 25,000 foot floor plate, and there's three of them, appeals to
large multi-floor users typically larger corporations that specifically need larger floor
areas; they pack in the work environments and that drives the parking requirements to
new levels. Fridley's current code for parking is four per thousand which would equal
about 300 parking stalls required. At a 10 foot width, the current parking allows about
240 which is well below what would be required. What they want to do is refurbish this
site and fix the parking problem so they can attract the kind of users described with a
building they believe will be competitively unique. The market is very sophisticated
when it comes to leasing or buying space and it is the rare deal that doesn't mandate
the number of parking spaces required in a lease from a company renting space in a
building. In other words, he could not lease the building to a company that needs 400
parking spaces and deliver only 230, nor would they enter into a lease without
stipulating there be sufficient parking. If they don't have to build a parking ramp, single
story structure, they would prefer not to. There's a 10 to 15% chance that simply by
approving the reduction in stall width on grade they could find a full building user for
which the 320 parking stalls would be adequate. Conceivably that fit could exist, but
based on the building's inherent design, its power capacity and its heating and cooling
capacity which are all attractive to high density users, his instinct and experience tells
him that more often than not they would be looking at users who need five or six parking
stalls per thousand square feet. Also, because of the restriction of no off-road parking
and the fact that a tenant typically wants to move into a building within 90 to 120 days,
the parking structure must be ready.
Commissioner Kuechle asked if the petitioner is the current owner of the building.
Mr. McCary responded that Yale Place Associates is under contract to purchase the
building. They have a binding contract with Target with contingencies, one of which is
solving the parking problem. He pointed out that in the HRA agreement, they have the
right to build as much parking structure as they want without any additional approvals.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 7 of 12
From what he can tell reading the document, there's no limitation on the number of
levels the parking structure can have. So, he didn't believe they're asking for anything
more than they already have the right to do and, in fact, they're trying to clean it up a
little. As far as the aisle width, Mr. McCary stated it is the standard width.
MOTION by Commissioner Kuechle, seconded by Commissioner Saba, to close the
public hearing.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:20 PM.
Commissioner Kuechle stated he is not concerned about the proposed ramp, but was
concerned about the 8.5 foot wide parking spaces.
Commissioner Saba also expressed concern about the narrower parking spaces and
the possibility of setting a precedent, but he believed this was something the Council
could address.
MOTION by Commissioner Johns, seconded by Commissioner Kuechle, to recommend
approval of MP #05-01 with the stipulations as stated.
1) Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction.
2) The proposed parking structure additions shall be architecturally compatible with
the existing building and finished with complementary building materials (as
shown in petitioner's plan entitled Parking Structure Elevation — South).
3) Parking stalls to be reduced to 9.5 feet, 9.0 feet, and 8.5 feet in width
respectively , shall be striped as identified in proposed plan and remain striped
as such unless further modifications are made to the Master Plan after
appropriate Commission / Council action has been taken.
4) No off-site parking will be permitted during construction of parking deck. All
necessary precautions and logistics planning must be done to assure public
safety and to assure demands will not be placed on adjacent parking facilities or
streets as a result of the parking deck construction.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
3. Consideration of a preliminary plat, PS #05-05, by United Defense, L.P.
to replat their property at 4800 East River Road NE.
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Kuechle, to open the
public hearing.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:22 PM.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 8 of 12
Ms. Jones explained that the petitioner, United Defense, was recently acquired by a
company called BAE Systems. The subject property is zoned M2, Heavy Industrial and
no change is proposed in the zoning. This site is surrounded by M2 zoning to the north,
south and east and park land to the west. The property has been developed since 1940
and has had various owners and alterations. There is one access point on the north
side on 51 St Way, and two East River Road access points. The United States Navy
used to own the northern portion of the property and the southern part of this site is
sealed as a contaminated Superfund site area and its part of their goal to keep that as a
separate parcel. The petitioner wants to clarify through this plat any future liability
related to past ownership boundaries because of some of the history on the site. They
want to make sure they keep the boundaries set according to who used to own certain
sections of the property. She reviewed the existing lot lines between Lots 1 and 2 run
through an existing building. State building code does not permit zero lot lines through
a building like this without clear separation between the buildings. This plat will
continue what is deemed a legal non-conforming status of the building. These two lots
into the future cannot be sold separately unless the building connections were closed off
to meet the code.
Ms. Jones further explained that the petitioner has requested to be exempt from the
park dedication fees typically associated with a plat. Staff and the City Attorney have
determined that in this case the fees should be waived because United Defense sold at
a discounted price property for park land to Anoka County. The City Code allows
donation of land in lieu of the park dedication fee, so the petitioner has met that
requirement. However, the waiving of the fee will be handled by the City Council so the
Planning Commission does not have to address that issue.
Ms. Jones stated staff recommends approval of this plat with the following stipulations:
1) Petitioner may not sell Lot 1 or Lot 2 independently without meeting all of the
requirements of the State Building Code.
2) Petitioner cannot geographically expand the legal nonconforming use building
complex on Lots 1 and 2 without requiring that remaining building be modified
to comply with all elements of the State Building Code. (Ms. Jones added for
clarification that this stipulation was typed incorrectly in the packet. She a/so
clari�ed that BAE Systems is allowed to do work inside the building but
cannot expand the footprint of the building without meeting all the building
code requirements.)
Commissioner Kuechle questioned if the petitioner will be the owner of all three lots.
He also questioned the narrow strip of land associated with Lot 2 that runs along the
perimeter of Lot 1 and which requires access across Lot 2 to reach Lot 1.
Ms. Jones responded the petitioner does own all three lots. As to the question
regarding access to Lot 1, Ms. Jones explained that code requires 25 feet of road
frontage which Lot 1 does have as well as an access point on 51 '/ Way.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 9 of 12
Chairperson Kondrick stated the concern would be if Lot 2 were sold, how that would
impact access to Lot 1, but his understanding of Ms. Jones' presentation is that the lots
cannot be sold separately.
Jeff VanKeuren, Public Affairs Manager for BAE Systems (the petitioner), explained
that they wish to keep the property lines the way they were when the Navy owned the
property for reasons of identifying if contamination were found in the former Navy
property in the future. It would be significantly easier to address such an issue with the
Navy if the property lines remain the same. As far as the park dedication fees, United
Defense has provided significant support to make improvements to the park land they
sold to Anoka County in 1982 at a considerable discount, greater than $1 million than
any estimate. They have also made significant contributions to the Anoka County park
system every year for at least the last eight years that he's been involved. They put in
$5,000 to $10,000 each year which Anoka County parks matches. In the last five years
alone, they have contributed in excess of $40,000. They have set a goal for continued
improvement of the park. Consequently they do not believe they should be subject to
the park dedication fee.
Mr. VanKeuren stated they do have reservations regarding the second stipulation as
they have not had ample time to study it. They want to understand more completely the
wording and have not had time to study it from the perspective of a future owner of the
property. They'll have to look at the stipulation more carefully.
Ms. Jones explained that it is her understanding the way the property exists today with
the lot line dividing the building, the building is currently legal nonconforming with the
state building code. So this stipulation simply reiterates the existing condition and limits
what can be done to the existing footprint of the building.
Mr. VanKeuren stated he understands the stipulation and thanked Ms. Jones for her
assistance, but they still need time to evaluate it.
Chairperson Kondrick commented that the petitioner will have the opportunity to
review the stipulation prior to the City Council meeting and action on this matter.
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to close the
public hearing.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DELCARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:40 PM.
Chairperson Kondrick stated he is chairman of the Parks and Recreation Commission
for the City and is aware of the petitioner's past performance and dedication to the
county park system. Even though the City typically does not waive park dedication
fees, in this case, the petitioner's past performance warrants the waiving.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 10 of 12
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Kuechle, to recommend
approval of preliminary plat PS #05-05 with the two stipulations presented and corrected
by staff.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
4. Consideration of a preliminary plat, PS #05-06, by the City of Fridley to
correct right-of-way boundaries for street reconstruction, legally
described as Lots 8, 9, and 10, Block 1, Oak Creek Addition, generally
located at Glen Creek Road and Logan Parkway.
MOTION by Commissioner Kuechle, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to open the
public hearing.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:43 PM.
Ms. Jones stated the replat of right-of-way and residential lots is being requested to
create an orderly public record and to allow for future land swaps. The City of Fridley
seeks to replat the properties located at 151 Glen Creek Road and the City-owned lot
directly south of Glen Creek Road for the purpose of defining right-of-way and excess
property ownership. The registered land survey plat was prompted by City street
reconstruction work in the area. Glen Creek Road does not have sufficient right-of-way
in certain areas to construct the proposed typical street section. As part of the 2005
street reconstruction project in this neighborhood, curb and gutter are being installed on
Glen Creek Road and the road is being slightly widened. Because of the street
construction project, the City is cleaning up improper lot lines. The current right-of-way
map does not match the existing location of the road. This plat will not impact access to
any of the adjoining private properties. Ms. Jones then reviewed the sizes of the tracts
involved as follows: Tract A— 180 square feet or .004 acres; Tract B 24,372 square feet
or .0560 acres; Tract C 4,665 square feet or .107 acres and Tract D 3,961 square feet
or .091 acres. Tract D is the tract that is intended to be traded as excess right-of-way.
Part of Tract C already exists as right-of-way. Tracts A and C become part of the
widened right-of-way. In a later action, the City expects to trade excess right-of-way
with adjacent property owners for right-of-way that is needed for the widening of the
service road. Adjacent property owners are supportive of the land swap proposed. She
stated staff recommends approval of this plat as an orderly public record will be created.
Staff does not recommend any stipulations as this land is already under City control.
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Kuechle, to close the
public hearing.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:46 PM.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 11 of 12
MOTION by Commissioner Kuechle, seconded by Commissioner Saba to recommend
approval of PS #05-07.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
5. Consideration of a preliminary plat, PS #0507, by the City of Fridley, to
correct right-of-way boundaries for street reconstruction, legally
described as Lots 12, 13 and 36, Block 12, Spring Brook Park, generally
located at Ely Street and Liberty Street.
MOTION by Commissioner Johns, seconded by Commissioner Kuechle, to open the
public hearing.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 8:47 PM.
Ms. Jones explained that the City is seeking to replat the right-of-way and industrial lots
to create an orderly public record and to allow for future land swaps. Replatting the
properties will better define right-of-way boundaries. The registered land survey plat is
being prompted by City street reconstruction work in the area. As part of the 2005
street reconstruction project, curb and gutter are being installed on the service drive
between Ely Street and Liberty Street. In addition, the service drive is being slightly
widened. In a later action, the City expects to trade excess right-of-way with adjacent
property owners for right-of-way that is needed for the widening of the service road.
Adjacent property owners are supportive of the land swap proposed. It will allow
owners to expand property square footage and, as a result, the owners may be able to
expand the building square footage in the way they wanted. The City proposes no
changes to the existing building. The current zoning is M1 and no changes are
proposed to the current zoning. The plat will not impact access to either of the adjoining
private properties. Tract A and C are the two tracts that are intended to be traded as
excess right-of-way. Sizes of the proposed tracts after the replat will be as follows:
Tract A(facing Ely Street) 1,173 square feet or 0.027 acres; Tract B(facing Ely Street)
5,778 square feet or .133 acres; Tract C(facing Liberty Street) 3,386 square feet or
.078 acres; Tract D(facing Liberty Street) 6,539 square feet or .150 acres. Staff
recommends approval of this plat request as an orderly public record will be created.
Staff does not recommend any stipulations as this land is already under City control.
She stated one letter was received from a property owner in the area, M.J. Fluten, but
believed the writer seems confused about the issue.
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to enter the
correspondence from M.J. Fluten into the record.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 6, 2005 Page 12 of 12
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Johns to close the public
hearing.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:53 PM.
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to recommend
approval of PS #05-07 as presented.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
6. Receive the minutes of the June 8, 2005 Appeals Commission meeting.
MOTION by Commissioner Kuechle, seconded by Commissioner Saba, to accept the
minutes as presented.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURN
MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Johns, to adjourn.
UPON A UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:55 PM.
Respectfully submitted by,
Rebecca Brazys
Recording Secretary
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
Date: July 19, 2005
To: William Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: SP #OS-02 Holiday Station Store Electronic Gas Price Sign Special Use Permit
Background
Amtech Lighting, on behalf of the Holiday Gas Station on 57t'' Avenue, desires to replace the existing gas pricing
sign at 200 — 57t'' Avenue with an electronic changeable sign. This type of sign requires approval of a special use
permit. At this time, this is the only Holiday Gas Station Store making this request. The sign would be placed on
an exiting three-section pylon sign along 57t'' Avenue. The sign meets all square footage and setback
requirements.
Commission Action
On July 6, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding SP #OS-02. No one from the public
appeared to testify on this item. Staff has not received any comments of concern from the public on this matter.
The Planning Commission, after a brief discussion, unanimously recommended approval of SP #OS-02, with the
three stipulations proposed by staff.
Recommendation
Staff concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve SP #OS-02, an electronic
changeable sign for the Holiday Station Store on 57t'' Avenue with the three stipulations in the attached staff
report.
M-OS-70
City of Fridley Land Use Application
SP #05-02 June 30, 2005
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
Amtech Lighting for Holiday Companies
200 — 57th Avenue NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Requested Action:
Special Use Permit for an automatic
changeable sign
Existing Zoning:
C-3, General Shopping
Location:
200 — 57th Avenue
Size:
59,292 sq. ft.
Existing Land Use:
Gasoline Station Store
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
N: 57th Ave NE & C-2
E: C-3 General Shopping
S: C-3 & I-694
W: Main Street & C-3
Comprehensive Plan Conformance:
Consistent with Plan
Building Code Conformance:
Conforming building according to State
Building Code
Zoning/Permit History:
1998 — Lot is platted
1999 — Gas Station constructed
1999 — Pylon, 3 wall, & 3 canopy sign
permits issued
Legal Description of Property:
Lot 1, Block 1, Holiday North 1St Addition
Public Utilities:
Building is connected
Transportation:
The property receives access from 57th Avenue
Physical Characteristics:
Lot is recessed down below the
elevation of Main Street and 57tn
Avenue with typical commercial
landscape.
SPECIAL INFORMATION
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Petitioner requests SUP to allow an automatic
changeable L.E.D. gas pricing sign in place of
the existing manually changeable gas pricing
section of the existing pylon sign.
SU M MARY OF ANALYSIS
City Staff recommends approval of this special
use permit request.
• The proposed use is an approved special
use in the sign code, provided the message
does not change more often than once
everv 45 seconds.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION / 60 DAY DATE
City Council — July 25, 2005
60 Day Date — August 1, 2005
Staff Report Prepared by: Julie Jones
SP #05-02 Holiday Gas Sign
Request
Amtech Lighting, as petitioner for Holiday Companies, is requesting approval of a special use
permit, under Seciton 214.07 of the City of Fridley sign code, for an automatic changeable sign
for the Holiday gas station at 200 — 57th Avenue NE. They plan to add a L.E.D. type gas pricing
section to the existing pylon sign located on the 57th Avenue side of the property, replacing the
existing 3'-9" x 6' manually pricing section with an L.E.D. type sign section of the same
dimensions.
The petitioner cites that this type of L.E.D. signage is the new industry standard for gas pricing.
The property is zoned C-3, General Shopping, so the commercial sign requirements apply to the
property. There is no desire by the petitioner to change any other signage on the property at this
time.
History
The property was originally platted in 1998 and
the Holiday Station Store was built in 1999.
The sign permit for the existing pylon sign was
also obtained in 1999.
Analysis
Automatic changeable signs are an approved
special use in any zoning district, provided the
message does not change more often than
once every 45 seconds. The sign also needs
to be in conformance with the sign
requirements for that district. One of these
requirements is that the free standing sign on which the sign will be included cannot exceed 80
sq. ft. in size. The existing pylon sign is 77.5 sq. ft. in size. It is the only free standing sign on the
property. A permit was issued for it in 1999, and it meets all of the other current sign
requirements for a commercial district. It is noted that the sign is also more than 50 feet from a
residential district
Staff
Recommendation
City Staff recommends approval
of the special use permit for SP
#05-02, with stipulations.
• Automatic changeable
signs are an approved
special use in any
zoning district, provided
the message does not
change more often than
once every 45 seconds
and provided the total
square footage of a free
standing sign does not
exceed 80 sq. ft. per
development.
Stipulations
Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of the above land use
requests:
1. Petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to installing any
signage on site.
2. Message on L. E. D. section of sign cannot change more often than once every 45
seconds.
3. Message on L.E.D. section of sign can never flash or have motion that may distract
vehicular traffic in area.
2
�
�
CffY OF
FRIQLEY
Date
To:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
July 19, 2005
William Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: Final Plat, PS #04-05, Yoava Klucsar
M-05-64
INTRODUCTION
On October 6, 2004, the Planning Commission considered plat request PS #04-05, by
Yoava Klucsar. Mr. Klucsar plans to replat the property located at 1420 Rice Creek
Road to create two single family lots. City Staff and the Planning Commission
recommend approval of plat request, PS #04-05, with 8 stipulations. At the October 25,
2004, City Council meeting, the preliminary plat was approved, with 8 stipulations.
RECOMMENDATION
City Staff and the Planning Commission recommend final plat approval of PS #04-05.
STIPULATIONS
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Property owner of record shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
Property owner of record at time of building permit application to pay required $1,
500 park fee prior to issuance of building permits.
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.
Petitioner to properly maintain Lot #2 until sale occurs.
Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems
located on the site are properly capped or removed.
Petitioner shall provide easements as shown on preliminary plat drawing.
The garage on Lot 2 shall remain for a maximum of one year. If the new
residential home is not constructed within that one year time frame, the garage
shall be demolished as garages are accessory uses in a single family zoning
district.
8. The garage on Lot 2 shall be made compatible with the future residential
structure on this site, through the addition of a residential roof design and siding.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PLAT, P.S. #04-05, KLUCSAR ADDITION, BY YOAVA
KLUCSAR, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CREATING TWO SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, GENERALLY
LOCATED AT 1420 RICE CREEK ROAD NE.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 6,
2004, and recommended approval of said plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for KLUCSAR
ADDITION at their October 25, 2004, meeting, with stipulations
attached as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, a copy of the plat KLUCSAR ADDITION has been attached as
Exhibit B.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council approves the
Final Plat for KLUCSAR ADDITION and directs the petitioner to record
plat at Anoka County within six months of this approval or such
approval shall be null and void.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 'ZrjTH
DAY OF JULY 2005.
SCOTT LUND - MAYOR
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
Page 2- Resolution -2004 - KLUCSAR ADDITION
EXHIBIT A
STIPULATIONS
1. Property owner of record shall obtain all necessary permits prior
to construction.
2. Property owner of record at time of building permit application
to pay required $1, 500 park fee prior to issuance of building
permits.
3. 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.
4. Petitioner to properly maintain Lot #2 until sale occurs.
5. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage
treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or
removed.
6. Petitioner shall provide easements as shown on preliminary plat
drawing.
7. The garage on Lot 2 shall remain for a maximum of one year. If
the new residential home is not constructed within that one year
time frame, the garage shall be demolished as garages are
accessory uses in a single family zoning district.
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
Date: July 19, 2005
To
From
William Burns, City Manager
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator
Rachel Harris, Environmental Planner
Subject: PS #OS-06 Glen Creek Road Plat
Background
As a part of the 2005 street reconstruction project in the northwest part of the city, the Public Works Director has
discovered discrepancies in right of way boundaries along a certain section of Glen Creek Road. The area
involves a residential lot at 151 Glen Creek Road and other properties along this section of roadway. Staff is
requesting a registered land survey preliminary plat approval. The purpose ofthe plat is to correct and clarify right
of way boundaries and allow for the future land swap of excess right of way.
Commission Action
On July 6, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding PS #OS-06. There were some
interested neighbors in the audience, but no one testified at the hearing.
The Planning Commission, after a brief discussion, unanimously recommended approval of PS #OS-06. There
were no stipulations proposed by staff.
Recommendation
Staff concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve PS #OS-06, the Glen Creek Road
plat as submitted.
I►I 1 • •.
City of Fridley Land Use Application
PS-05-06
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
City of Fridley
6431 University Ave NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Requested Action:
Replat of right-of-way and residential lots to
allow future land swap to create an orderly
public record
Existing Zoning:
R-1 Single Family Residential
Location:
151 Glen Creek Rd and City owned lot directly
south of Glen Creek Rd
Size:
33,178 square feet .762 acres
Existing Land Use:
R-1 One Family Residential and Right-of-Way
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
N: Oak Glen Creek and R-1 Single Family
Residential
E: R-1 One Family Residential
S: Glen Creek Rd and R-1 Single Family
Residential
W: R-1 Single Family Residential and Park
Comprehensive Plan Conformance:
Use of property is consistent with Plan.
Zoning Ordinance Conformance:
One Family Residential is a permitted use in R-1
zoning districts.
Zoning History:
• 1954 - Lot is platted
• 1954 - Building permit issued
Legal Description of Property:
Lot 9, Block 7, "Oak Creek Addition"
Public Utilities:
Property is connected.
Transportation:
Lot will be accessed by Glen Creek Drive
Physical Characteristics:
Relatively flat, with building and right-of-way.
June 28, 2005
SPECIAL INFORMATION
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
City of Fridley, Petitioner, seeks to replat the properties
located at 151 Glen Creek Rd and the City-owned lot
directly south of Glen Creek Rd for the purpose of
defining right-of-way and excess property ownership.
SU M MARY OF ANALYSIS
City Staff recommends approval of this plat request.
Staff Report Prepared by: Rachel Harris
PS #05-06
PROJECT SUMMARY
City of Fridley, Petitioner, seeks to replat the properties located at 151 Glen Creek Road and a city-
owned lot directly south of Glen Creek Road to better define right-of-way boundaries. The property,
as existing, contains single family residential districts on the north, east, south and west. A park
lies to the southwest. The Petitioner proposes no changes to the existing residential property.
The current zoning is R-1. The petitioner proposes no changes to the current zoning.
The registered land survey plat is being prompted by City street reconstruction work in the area.
The Glen Creek Road area does not have sufficient right-of-way in certain areas to construct the
proposed typical street section. As part of the 2005 street reconstruction proj ect in this
neighborhood, curb and gutter are being installed on Glen Creek Road. As a result the road is
being slightly widened. Because of the street construction project, the City is cleaning up
improper lot lines. The current right-of way map does not match the existing location of the road.
In a later action, the City expects to trade excess right-of-way with adj acent property owners for
right-of-way that is needed for the widening of the service road. Adj acent property owners are
supportive of the land swap proposed.
V
������r �
�� �
LEGEND
* 151 Glen
��?� Creek Road
L�I� F"I�ah'�' ' � Clty—
owned lot
Zoning map of proposed replat and surrounding area
ANALYSIS
The proposed tracts after the replat are listed below.
• The proposed Tract A will be 180 square feet or 0.004 acres in size after the replat.
• The proposed Tract B will be 24,372 square feet or 0.560 acres in size after the replat.
• The proposed Tract C will be 4,665 square feet or 0.107 acres in size after the replat.
• The proposed Tract D will be 3,961 square feet or 0.091 acres in size after the replat.
Ariel map of 151 Glen Creek Road and the area surrounding the proposed replat. Map not to scale.
The plat will not impact access
to any of the adj oining private
properties. Tract D is the tract
that is intended to be traded as
excess right of way. (See
registered land survey in
packet.) Part of tract C already
exists as the right-of-way.
Tracts A and C become part of
the widened right-of way.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Staff recommends approval of this plat request.
• Creates an orderly public record.
• Staff does not recommend any stipulations as
this land is already under City control.
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
Date: July 19, 2005
To
From
William Burns, City Manager
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator
Rachel Harris, Environmental Planner
Subject: PS #OS-07 Ely/Liberty Street Service Drive Plat
Background
As a part of the 2005 street reconstruction project in the northwest part of the city, the Public Works Director has
discovered a need to clarify right of way boundaries along a service drive from Ely Street to Liberty Street along
the railroad tracks. The area involves a business at 160 Ely Street and 160 Liberty Street. The service drive needs
to be slightly widened, resulting in a need to change the right of way lines. Staff is requesting a registered land
survey preliminary plat approval. The purpose of the plat is to correct and clarify right of way boundaries and
allow for the future land swap of excess right of way.
Commission Action
On July 6, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding PS #OS-07. There were some
interested neighbors in the audience, but no one testified at the hearing. Staff did receive one letter from a resident
at 176 Ely Street opposing the widening of the service drive. The letter did not say anything about the plat.
The Planning Commission, after a brief discussion, unanimously recommended approval of PS #OS-07. There
were no stipulations proposed by staff.
Recommendation
Staff concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve PS #OS-07, the Ely/Liberty Street
service drive plat as submitted.
M-OS-71
City of Fridley Land Use Application
PS-05-07
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
City of Fridley
6431 University Ave NE
Fridley, MN 55432
Requested Action:
Replat of right-of-way and industrial lots to
allow future land swap to create an orderly
public record
Existing Zoning:
M-1 Light Industrial
Location:
160 Ely St
Size:
16,876 square feet .388 acres
Existing Land Use:
160 Ely St - Light Industrial and Service Road
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
N: Ely St and M-1 Light Industrial
E: Railroad
S: Liberty St and M-1 Light Industrial
W: R-1 Single Family Residential
Comprehensive Plan Conformance:
Use of property is consistent with Plan.
Zoning Ordinance Conformance:
Wholesaling, warehousing, manufacturing,
construction or service uses are a permitted use
in M-1 zonin� districts.
Zoning History for 160 Ely St:
• 1953 - Lot is platted
• 1961 - Building permit issued (Industrial)
• 1963 - Building permit issued (Addition)
Legal Description of Property:
Lot 12, 13 and 36, Block 12, "Spring Brook
Park, Anoka County, Minnesota"
Public Utilities:
Property is connected.
Transportation:
Lot will be accessed by Service Drive and
Liberty Street
Physical Characteristics:
Relatively flat, with building and parking lot.
June 28, 2005
SPECIAL INFORMATION
SITE OF REPLAT
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
City of Fridley, petitioner, seeks to replat the properties
located at 160 Ely St for the purpose of defining right-
of-way and excess property ownership.
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS
City Staff recommends approval of this plat request.
Staff Report Prepared by: Rachel Harris
PS #05-07
PROJECT SUMMARY
City of Fridley, Petitioner, seeks to replat the properties located at 160 Ely St to better define
right-of-way boundaries. The property, as existing, contains a light industrial district on the west
and a service road on the east. The registered land survey plat is being prompted by City street
reconstruction work in the area. As part of the 2005 street reconstruction proj ect in this
neighborhood, curb and gutter are being installed on the service drive between Ely St and
Liberty St. In addition, the service drive is being slightly widened.
The Petitioner proposes no changes to the existing building. The current zoning is M-1. The
Petitioner proposes no changes to the current zoning.
In a later action, the City expects to trade excess right-of-way with adj acent property owners for
right-of-way that is needed for the widening of the service road. Adj acent property owners are
supportive of the land swap proposed. It will allow owners to expand property square footage,
and as a result, the owners may be able to expand the building square footage in the way they
wanted.
.��'� � `�
,.
� ' � �
ry�*; 4� t
....��a,�-�sP�b.�.,dd � ws3.... ....
�5��� �� � �����,
� Indicates 160 Ely Street
Zoning map of area surrounding area of proposed replat
ANALYSIS
The existing lots and proposed tracts after the replat are listed below.
Existing Sq Ft Acres Proposed Sq Ft Acres
Lot 36 (Facing Ely Tract A(Facing Ely
St) 6,951.00 0.160 St) 1,173.00 0.027
Tract B (Facing Ely
St) 5,778.00 0.133
Lots 12 and 13 Tract C(Facing
(Facing Liberty St) 9,925.00 0.228 Liberty St) 3,386.00 0.078
Tract D (Facing
Liberty St) 6,539.00 0.150
16, 876.0
Total 16, 876. 00 0.388 Total 0 0.388
The plat will not impact access to either of the adj oining private properties. Tract A and C are
the two tracts that are intended to be traded as excess right of way. Tracts B and D already
consist of the Service Drive.
Ariel map of 160 Ely Street and the area surrounding the proposed replat
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Staff recommends approval of this
plat request.
• Creates an orderly public record.
Staff does not recommend any
stipulations as this land is already
under City control.
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
T�:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
William W. Burns, City Manager
Jon Fi. Fiaukaas, Public Works Director
July 5, 2005
ST 2005-3: 73-1/2 Avenue Reconstruction
PW05-041
The attached resolution accepts the preliminary plans for the reconstruction and extension of
73-1/2 Avenue. This project is a result of the approved Van Auken Addition plat combined
with the planned Capital Improvement project for this street.
The resolution establishes a public hearing for the project before the City Council at its August
8, 2005 meeting. The preliminary assessment list will be adopted at this time based on
existing City policy and the development agreement for the Van Auken Addition plat.
Recommend the City Council adopt the resolution to receive the preliminary plans and establish
a public hearing for the reconstruction of 73-1/2 Avenue.
Jtiti:cz
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -
RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE PRELIMINARY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MATTER OF CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS: NEIGHBORHOOD STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.
2005 - 3
WHEREAS, the construction of certain improvements is deemed to be in the interest of the City of
Fridley and the property owners affected thereby.
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2005 - 32 adopted on the llth day of July, 2005, by the City Council,
ordered the preliminary report and estimates of the costs thereof for the improvements in this project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Fridley as follows:
1. That the preliminary report and preliminary plans prepared by the Public Works Director, is
hereby received and accepted.
2. That the City Clerk shall act to ascertain the name and address of the owner of each parcel of
land directly affected or within the area of lands as may be proposed to be assessed for said
improvements, and calculate estimates of assessments as may be proposed relative thereto
against each of said lands.
3. That the area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of them as noted in
said notice are all the lands and areas as noted in said notice: All of the same to be assessed
proportionately according to the benefits received.
4. That the estimates of assessments of the Clerk shall be available for inspection to the owner
of any parcel of land as may be affected thereby at any public hearing held relative thereto, as
well as at any prior time reasonable and convenient.
Resolution No. 2005 -
Page 2
5. That a public hearing be scheduled for August 8, 2005 and that all property owners whose
property is liable to be assessed with the making of the improvements and constitute 100
percent of the property owners who will benefit from the improvement be notified of the
public hearing under the normal procedures set forth in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 25th
DAY OF JULY 2005.
SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR
ATTESTED:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
CITY OF FRIDLEY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON IMPROVEMENTS
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Fridley will meet in the Fridley Municipal Center Council
Chambers, 6431 University Ave NE, Fridley, MN, on the 8t'' day of August 2005 at 7:30 pm to conduct a public
hearing to consider making of the following improvement all pursuant to Minn Statutes §429.011 to 429.111:
NEIGHBORHOOD STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2005 - 3
The general nature of the improvements include pavement removal, road extension with grading, aggregate base,
concrete curb and gutter, new bituminous surfacing, restoration of boulevard sod, driveways, extension of the water
and sanitary sewer system and other facilities.
The estimated cost for the improvement is $59,219. The assessment area includes all those properties abutting the
streets proposed for reconstruction. The street involved in this proj ect is 73 '/2 Avenue NE from 200 ft to 560 feet west
of Pinetree Lane.
A reasonable estimate of the impact of the assessment was presented in the Preliminary Report and will be available
at the public hearing.
Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Hearing
impaired persons planning to attend the public hearing who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who
require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Calling at 763-572-3550 no later than July 22, 2005.
City of Fridley
Opinion of Probable Cost
73 1/2 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
19-J u I-05
LRO
Schedule A- Streets Qty Unit Unit Cost Total Cost
Mobilization 1 LS $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500.00
Remove Concrete Curb & Gutter 40 LF $ 7.00 $ 280.00
Remove Bituminous Pavement & Curb 900 SY $ 4.00 $ 3,600.00
Saw Cut Bituminous Pavement 50 LF $ 2.50 $ 125.00
Common Excavation 750.00 CY $ 15.00 $ 11,250.00
F&I Aggregate Base - Class 5 300 TON $ 12.00 $ 3,600.00
Mill Bituminous Surface (3.5" depth) 20 SY $ 10.00 $ 200.00
F&I Type LV3 Wearing Course Mixture B( 115 TON $ 50.00 $ 5,750.00
F&I Type MV3 Base Course Mixture B(w/oil 135 TON $ 50.00 $ 6,750.00
F&I Bituminous Tack Coat 50 GAL $ 3.00 $ 150.00
F&I Concrete Curb & Gutter-Design B618 550 LF $ 12.00 $ 6,600.00
Traffic Control 1 LS $ 500.00 $ 500.00
F&I Silt Fence 150 LF $ 5.00 $ 750.00
F&I Sod, Type Lawn 600 SY $ 4.00 $ 2,400.00
SubTotal $ 44,455.00
chedule B - Sanitary Sewer
Connect to Ex Sanitary Sewer
8" PVC SDR 35 Sanitary Sewer Main
4" PVC Schedule 40 Service
8"x4" Service Wve
1
140
180
4
Unit
EA
EA
EA
EA
Unit Cost
$ 500.00
$ 30.00
$ 20.00
$ 100.00
SubTotal
Estimated Cost
$ 500.00
$ 4,200.00
$ 3,600.00
$ 400.00
$ 8,700.00
Schedule C- Water Main Qty Unit Unit Cost Estimated Cost
1" Corp 4 EA $ 500.00 $ 2,000.00
1" Copper Service 230 EA $ 30.00 $ 6,900.00
Curb Stop 4 EA $ 20.00 $ 80.00
SubTotal $ 8,980.00
Subtotal $ 53,835.00
Contingency 10% $ 5,383.50
Grand Total $ 59,218.50
�
�
CffY OF
FRIdLEY
Name
Randi
Schanus
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
Position
Patrol Officer
Non-exempt
Appointment
Starting
Salarv
$17.95
per hour
(2005 contract)
Ryan PatrolOfficer $17.95
George Non-exempt per hour
(2005 contract)
Starting
Date
July 26,
2005
July 26,
2005
Replaces
Nathaniel
Behlen
Retirement
pending
� AGENDA ITEM
� COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
CLAIMS
122447 - 122623
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
�TM °F J U LY 25, 2005
FRIDLEY
Contractor T e A licant A roved B
All Elements Inc Commercial John Thurber Ron Julkowski, CBO
B& B Sheet Metal & Roofing Commercial Brad Burns Ron Julkowski, CBO
B& D Construction Residential Bruce Saari State of MN
Beneficial Co oration Electrical Brian Pellerzi State of MN
Bruce Nelson Plbg & Htg Serv Plumbing Bruce Nelson State of MN
CC of MN Inc Residential Carter Hanson State of MN
Case Handyman Services of SP Residential Mark Overkamp State of MN
Cedar Mana ement Commercial Dennis Hazelton Ron Julkowski, CBO
Commercial Plb & Ht Inc Gas Services Robert Skeie Ron Julkowski, CBO
Commercial Plbg & Htg Inc Heating Robert Skeie Ron Julkowski, CBO
Commercial Plbg & Htg Inc Plumbing Robert Skeie State of MN
Curtis Krabbenhoft Residential Curtis Krabbenhoft State of MN'
De endable Indoor Air Qualit Heatin James Holt Ron Julkowski, CBO
De endable Indoor Air Qualit Gas Services James Holt Ron Julkowski, CBO
Designer Sign Systems Inc Sign Erector Dan Ginkel Ron Julkowski, CBO
Earth Wizards Inc Blacktopping Shelly Skow Ron Julkowski, CBO
Exterior Innovations Residential Jim Jenkins State of MN
G& L Electric Electrical Terry Daun State of MN
Greater MN Home Im rovement Reidential Ron De ru illier State of MN
Haglin C F& Sons Inc Commercial Tom Goering Ron Julkowski, CBO
Highpoint Builders Residential Kirk Cristilly State of MN
M& D Plumbin & Ht Inc Plumbin Michael Deleiden State of MN
M& D Plumbin & Ht Inc Gas Services Michael Deleiden Ron Julkowski, CBO
M& D Plumbing & Htg Inc Heating Michael Deleiden Ron Julkowski, CBO
Minco Products Inc Commercial John Toohey Ron Julkowski, CBO
Modern Electrical Solutions Electrical Jerry Ranem State of MN
Oaks Electric Co Electrical Steve Johnson State of MN
River Ci Sheet Metal Inc Gas Services Chris Ra Ron Julkowski, CBO
River City Sheet Metal Inc Heating Chris Rapp Ron Julkowski, CBO
River City Sheet Metal Inc Plumbing Chris Rapp State of MN
Schadegg Mechanical Inc Heating Daniel Schadegg Ron Julkowski
Schadegg Mechanical Inc Gas Services Daniel Schadegg Ron Julkowski
Schade Mechanical Inc Plumbin Daniel Schade State of MN
Soderlin Plumbing Htg & Air Plumbing Mary Lowther State of MN
Suburban Air Heating Richard Allee Ron Julkowski, CBO
Suburban Air Gas Services Richard Allee Ron Julkowski, CBO
1284 Norton A ts LLC Commercial Daren Wilke Ron Julkowski, CBO
US Remodeling Inc Residential Dave Ruett State of MN
Vinco Inc Electrical Steve Anderson State of MN
Walter Mechanical Inc Gas Services Rich Walter Ron Julkowski, CBO
Walter Mechanical Inc Heatin Rich Walter Ron Julkowski, CBO
Weld & Sons Plumbin Co Plumbin Tim Mohn State of MN
Wellington Windows Commercial Susan Ambuson Ron Julkowski, CBO
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 2
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 3
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: June 13, 2005
Charter Commission Review: July 18, 2005
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
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
Date: July 19, 2005
To: William Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: PS #OS-OS BAE Systems (United Defense) Plat
Background
BAE Systems, formally United Defense at the time of application, is requesting approval of plans to replat their
property lines. There are three parcels of land in their existing plat. The petitioner's preliminary plat drawings
show three parcels with new parcel boundary lines. The reason for the change in the boundary lines is to clarify
current and future legal liability for contaminated areas of the site. Details about each parcel are in the attached
staff report.
There is an unusual feature of this plat. The lot line between lots 1 and 2 runs through the middle of the main
building complex. This is a legal, non-conforming situation since the building code does not allow zero lot lines
through a building without complete closed separations. The building complex is currently designed so that
employees can freely travel from one side of the building to the other. The proposed plat continues this non-
conformity, and the stipulations proposed by staff specify the continued nonconformity.
Commission Action
On July 6, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding PS #OS-O5. No one from the general
public appeared at the public hearing to testify.
The Planning Commission, after a brief discussion, unanimously recommended approval of the BAE Systems
preliminary plat request, with two stipulations proposed by staff.
Recommendation
Staff concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve PS #OS-O5, the BAE Systems
plat, with the two stipulations in the attached staff report.
M-OS-72
City of Fridley Land Use Application
PS #05-05 June 29, 2005
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
United Defense (now BAE Systems)
4800 East River Road
Fridley, MN 55421
Requested Action:
Plat — dividing property into 3 parcels
Existing Zoning:
M-2, Heavy Industrial
Location:
4800 East River Road
Size:
5,911,658 sq. ft. 135.71 acres
Existing Land Use:
Manufacturing facility
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
N: M-2, Heavy Industrial
E: M-2, Heavy Industrial
S: M-2, Heavy Industrial
W: P, County Park
Comprehensive Plan Conformance:
Consistent with Plan for redevelopment
Building Code Conformance:
Legal, non-conforming building
according to State Building Code
Zoning History:
1940 — Building construction began
1952 — Lot is platted
1969 — FMC purchased property
1974 — Building Alteration permit
1981 — Building permit for office
1983 — Building permit for pump house
1989 — Building Alteration permits
1990 — Building permit for cafe
1991 to date —13 add'I alteration permits
Legal Description of Property:
Auditor's Subdivision #79 — complete
legal description is on file at City Hall
Public Utilities:
Building is connected
Transportation:
The property receives access from East River
Road and 51 St Wav N E
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Physical Characteristics:
Parcels are fully developed, containing
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
United Defense, which was recently purchased
by BAE Systems, desires to plat their property
in a manner that will preserve future liability of
contaminated areas on site.
SU M MARY OF ANALYSIS
City Staff recommends approval of this variance
request.
• Petitioner has demonstrated hardship.
• Similar variance requests have been
granted to businesses in the past.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION / 60 DAY DATE
City Council — July 25, 2005
60 Day Date — August 1, 2005
Staff Report Prepared by: Julie Jones
PS#05-05 U n ited Defense
Summary of Application
BAE Systems (formally, United Defense) is requesting approval of a preliminary plat from the
City of Fridley, which will subdivide their property at 4800 East River Road into three lots.
Currently, the land has a lengthy meets and bounds description. It should be noted that United
Defense was purchased by BAE Systems on June 24, 2005, following the petitioner's
application. This explains why some file documents refer to both company names.
The purpose of creating three separate parcels in the odd property division lines shown is to
preserve the liability the Navy will continue to have for soil or water contamination over time on
property they used to own and to preserve the liability the Northern Pump or FMC businesses
have for different contaminated areas on the site. In addition, BAE Systems is interested in
leasing part of their building space on the north end of the property in the future. In order for
such a lease arrangement to work, they need to keep the old property divisions and
corresponding liability separated.
The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. There is no desire by the petitioner to change the
zoning of the property.
Proposed Plat
The petitioner is proposing to divide the land they currently own into
three separate parcels. The division of the parcels may appear odd,
but can be explained by the history of past ownership of the land.
Up until June 17, 2004 the U.S. Navy owned the north portion of
the property. This section of land is represented as Lot 1 in the
proposed plat. It may appear odd that the proposed south property
line does not extend west all the way to East River Road. However,
the proposed lot line follows the fact that this section of land was
not previously owned by the Navy.
The south property line of Lot 1 may also appear odd as it takes
may jogs and turns. Again, this uneven property line follows the
division in the building structure which used to be separate U.S.
Government and private ownership. In case there is any new contaminated areas discovered in
the future, BAE Systems wants to have clear distinction of liability by matching new lot divisions
according to old property divisions between United Defense and the Navy.
Lot 3 is being created as a separate lot to distinguish the boundaries of a known Superfund site
that contains a containment facility. The petitioner's staff says they expect to remain the owners
of this lot for many years to come.
There are monitoring wells in the area shown as Lot 2 on the preliminary plat drawing. Thus, the
petitioner wants to keep this lot separate to distinguish the legal obligations they would have in
the future for this section of land.
Site History
Northern Pump first began development of the petitioner's site in 1940. The area was originally
platted in 1952. FMC purchased the property in 1969. United Defense owned the property until
last month as part of their armaments division and had about 1,500 employees at the Fridley
site. It is staff's understanding that no staff changes have occurred since BAE Systems
purchased the property on June 24th of this year.
There is a great deal of unused space in the building at the north end of the site that the
petitioner would like to lease out. In order for the company to feel comfortable leasing space,
however, they would like to plat the property lines according to past ownership to protect
themselves from any future legal responsibilities. They also want to ensure proper ownership
responsibilities for the contaminated area at the south end of the site.
Analysis
Staff was initially concerned about the division between Lot 1 and Lot 2 that runs through the
main structure on the site. Because the State Building Code does not permit zero lot lines
between buildings without complete closed separations (there are several walkways between
these sections of the structure currently as it is constructed), the plat as shown makes the
building a legal, non-conforming building. This means the building can remain as is but cannot
be geographically expanded. Any uses in the building must also remain allowable M-2, Heavy
Industrial, uses. However, if United Defense sells Lot 1 or Lot 2, then the building would need to
be separated according to code.
Park Fee
The petitioner has requested a waiver on the park dedication fees. The fee on this 135.713 acre
plat would be nearly $136,000. United Defense argues that the code states the park dedication
fee only applies to plats less than 5 acres. In addition, they argue that they sold some of their
land to Anoka County for the Riverfront Park at a discounted price in excess of $700,000. They
contend that this contribution meets the park land contribution requirement of code. Their
complete letter and our City Attorney's response are attached.
Staff Recommendation
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. Petitioner may not sell Lot 1 or Lot 2 independently without meeting all of the
requirements of the State Building Code.
2. Petitioner cannot geographically expand the legal nonconforming use of building
complex on Lots 1 and 2 without requiring that remaining building be modified to comply
with all elements of the State Building Code.
2
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
Date: July 21, 2005
To: William Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: MP #OS-01 Master Plan Amendment for 6499 University Avenue
Request
Yale Place Associates, who is hoping to purchase the former Target Northern Operations Center at 6499
University Avenue, desires to amend their Master Plan to allow smaller width parking stalls and a different
location for a parking ramp. The Petitioner states that the building is under-parked and that they need to have
additional parking in order to competitively market the building to potential occupants.
H ISt01"j/
In 1982, the Target NOC property, the City Hall property, and the property south of City Hall were
rezoned to S-2, Redevelopment District. As a result of that rezoning, a Master Plan was approved and in
1985 the two-story Corporate Office complex was constructed and exists as it is today. Yale Associates
are negotiating the purchase of this building from Target Corporation. Please see attached drawing of the
existing conditions.
Yale Associates is the petitioner and is proposing to re-design the parking lot in order to construct
additional on-site parking (both surface and structured) for the existing building. The current parking
configuration involves land owned by the City of Fridley. In 1982, Target Corporation purchased a
$135,000.00 Treasury Bond in the City's name. The annual dividends from that bond have generated a
parking lot lease payment of approximately $15,000.00/year. The agreement signed at the time the land
was developed, specified a sale of the property (to Target Corporation) in the year 2014, for a price of
$300,000.00. The petitioner has asked if the City/HRA would entertain the idea of an early sale of the
property to Yale Associates.
Further, Yale Associates is proposing to reduce the majority of the parking stall widths from the code
required 10 feet to 8.5 feet, which will allow an additional 32 main level parking stalls. There are
currently 288 total parking stalls on the site. Six are accessible stalls and 282 are 9' width stalls. The
petitioner's proposal for redesigning the main level parking, removes almost all of the landscape islands
on the site, including 15 trees.
Please see the attached drawing showing the re-design of the parking lot and the location of the proposed
parking deck additions. This proposal differs from the location proposed in the developer's agreement for
the project, which designated the eastern section of the lot next to St'' Street as the area for a future
parking ramp.
You may recall in 2003, the HRA and the Planning Commission reviewed and made recommendations on
an amendment as it pertained to the Columbia Park Medical Centers revised parking plan that called for 9,
rather than 10' parking stalls. Overall, the HRA was supportive of this master plan amendment;
however, the members did express concern about reducing the parking stall width from 10 feet to 9 feet.
They would encourage the developer to consider reducing the stall width to 9 feet primarily for the
employee parking areas. City staff conveyed this HRA concern to a Columbia Park representative and
ultimately, Council required that the stalls immediately adjacent to the building be left as 10' customer
stalls, since greater daytime turn-over would likely occur in these stalls.
The current proposal places larger 9.5' wide stalls and accessible parking stalls closest to the building, to
address the HRA and Council concerns expressed during the earlier proposal.
It should also be noted that the HRA recently commissioned a parking study of this redevelopment area.
The conclusion of the parking study is that the buildings to the north and south of City Hall are short in
meeting their parking needs. However, City Hall has adequate parking. The City staff plans to address
this problem by signing the lower level parking deck as reserved for City employees only. The upper level
of the City Hall parking deck will be marked for visitor parking and will be shared with the surrounding
buildings.
Parking Deck
A parking Deck has been proposed and may begin as soon as this fall. As proposed the parking deck
would be set away from the building and would be centered over existing surface parking. The ultimate
size of the ramp will depend somewhat on tenant demands for parking. You'll note in the illustrations
two options have been proposed. One option allows for a 104 stall ramp and one is for a 148 stall ramp.
Installation of a parking ramp results in the loss of 42 main level parking stalls. Thus, the 104 stall
parking ramp would provide a net count of 382 parking stalls and the larger ramp option would net 426
parking stalls.
The largest of the two parking structure options is what will be considered the Master Planned Deck.
This will be done with the understanding that anything beyond that footprint will be brought back for
Master Plan review and modification. Any of the options less than the full build-out will be within this
Master Plan and will be able to be built without further Master Plan Review.
As proposed the exterior of the deck will be finished with materials and colors that compliment the
existing building.
Building permits and Fire Marshal approval will be required, prior to commencement of construction of
the proposed parking deck.
Commission Action
On July 6, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding MP #OS-01. No one from the
public appeared to testify on this item. Staff has received a couple telephone inquiries regarding the public
hearing notice, but no objections from the public on this matter.
The Planning Commission, after a lengthy discussion, unanimously recommended approval of MP #OS-01,
with the four stipulations proposed by staff (this is numbers 1-4 below).
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) reviewed this plan at its July 7, 2005, meeting. The
HRA does not have the authority to approve or deny the parking amendment request, but Code requires
the Authorities input, as this project is within a redevelopment district. The HRA had some concerns over
the parking stall width reduction request. However, the HRA still needs to discuss further and make a
decision regarding the early buyout request for the City's portion of the parking lot, which is covered in
the Developer's Agreement for this project — not the Master Plan.
Following the Planning Commission meeting, staff has studied some of the issues raised. A valid concern
was raised about the loss of landscaping with the main level parking redesign. As the remainder of the
building at 6499 University is well landscaped, staff feels there is no option for the petitioner to replace the
lost trees elsewhere on the site. In addition, staff believes the loss of the landscape islands that include eight
mature crab apple trees would negatively impact the appearance of the building. Staff recommends that the
new parking layout be modified to keep those four parking lot landscape islands closest to the entrance of the
building. In addition, staff recommends that the petitioner work with a landscape architect to find a means to
soften the appearance of the parking structure with landscaping.
Recommendation
Staff concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve MP #OS-01, Master Plan
Amendment for 6499 University Avenue with the six stipulations below. Staff has added stipulation 5 and 6
as a response to the landscaping concerns of the Planning Commission.
Stipulations
1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction.
2. The proposed parking structure additions shall be architecturally compatible with the existing
building and finished with complementary building materials (as shown in petitioner's plan
entitled Parking Structure Elevation - South).
3. Parking stalls to be reduced to 9.5 feet, 9.0 feet, and 8.5 feet in width respectively, shall be
striped as identified in proposed plan and remain striped as such unless further modifications
are made to the Master Plan after appropriate Commission/ Council action has been taken.
4. No off-site parking will be permitted during construction of parking deck All
necessary precautions and logistics planning must be done to assure public safety and
to assure demands will not be placed on adj acent parking facilities, or streets, as a
result of the parking deck construction.
5. Petitioner shall develop a revised parking plan that preserves the four landscape
parking islands and eight trees next to the building that meets staff's approval.
6. Petitioner shall work with a landscape architect to find a means to soften the appearance of
the parking structure with landscaping.
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEI'
T�:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
William W. Burns, City Manager
Jon Fi. Fiaukaas, Public Works Director
July 21, 2005
2005 I`leighborhood Street Improvement Project I`lo. ST. 2005 - 1
PW05-044
Attached is change order I`io. 1 for the 2005 I`ieighborhood Street Improvement Project I`io. ST.
2005 - 1. These are all associated with the design revisions to meet the Rice Creek
Watershed District requirements.
The deductions equal �47,032.70. The additions equal �139,862.90. The net cost for
change order I`lo. 1 is therefore �91,790.20.
Recommend the City Council approve change order I`io. 1 for the 2005 I`ieighborhood Street
Reconstruction Project I`lo. ST. 2005 - 1 to Palda 8� Sons in the amount of �91,790.20.
Jtiti:cz
Attachment
�
� AGENDA ITEM
��F CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 25, 2005
FRIDLEY
INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS