Loading...
10/23/2006 - 00027676CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY OCTOBER 23, 2006 The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 8:30 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 Wolfe Councilmember Bolkcom MEMBER ABSENT: Councilmember Billings OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Richard Pribyl, Finance Director Fritz Knaak, City Attorney Connie Thompson, Fridley Sr. Program Coordinator Robert Hartley, Attorney for Mohamed Amro Mohamed Amro, 59 Rice Creek Parkway Fred and Mary Mykkanen, 6840 Jefferson St. NE Michael Young, 6730 Quincy St. NE Thomas Hunt, 6700 Kennaston Dr. NE John Falldin, 201 69th Ave. NE Kelly Pogatchnik, 6360 Jackson St. NE Scott Prebish, 740 Bennett Dr. NE Donald Anderson, 7304 W. Circle NE PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: Connie Thompson, Senior Program Coordinator, shared some of the things they are doing with the Senior Program. She said the Senior Program is considered a community focal point by the Metropolitan Area agency on aging. The Senior Center is considered a"one stop shop" so when a senior has an issue they can come to the Senior Center and get referrals or support. The Senior Center offers recreation, social services, wellness and health, and nutrition. The Fridley Senior Center nutrition program is the largest in Anoka County and in the month of September they served over 1,400 meals. On average there are 50-65 seniors using the nutrition center per day. Special event days can bring in as many as 200 seniors. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 2 Ms. Thompson stated that information, referrals and education are a big part of the Senior Program. A recent program with the Fridley Community Education and the Minnesota International Center (Great Decisions) was created that talks about foreign policy issues. The first issue was on LTN and LTN reform. This program will be offered on a monthly basis, and some of the future topics include Brazil, India, China, terrorism and human rights, and we are looking at some other current topics to debate. Comments from the seniors will be referred to the Foreign Policy Association in New York. Ms. Thompson stated that volunteer opportunities are another big piece of the Senior Program. The Fridley Alternative High School has students who transferred from another school or are from a foreign country who don't know how to read. These students may be reading at a third grade level and three seniors are currently being trained to be reading tutors to work one on one with these students. Ms. Thompson stated that their Chores and More Program is another part of the Senior Program. She talked about how the program works. Currently, 551 households are in the data base and in 2005, 313 households were served with 5,555 hours of services. She said 53% of the jobs were outdoor jobs such as snow removal, raking, mowing and 47% were indoor jobs like house cleaning, wall washing, painting and minor repairs. In 2005, 1,324 volunteer hours were turned in from 61 volunteers. There has been a 21% increase for services in 2006. Councilmember Wolfe asked how many seniors use the center daily. Ms. Thompson replied that 125 to 150 seniors visit the Senior Center each day. Councilmember Wolfe stated that he visits the center often and every day the parking lot seems full. He said it is probably one of the best uses of the facilities in the City of Fridley. Ms. Thompson replied that they have a good time at the Senior Center. The senior volunteers work hard but they enjoy what they are doing. Councilmember Barnette asked if people need to be a Fridley resident to be part of the Senior Program. Ms. Thompson replied no. She said 75% of the participants are residents of Fridley. Mayor Lund asked what the capacity of the Senior Center was and if there was a waiting list. Ms. Thompson replied that certain programs and special events, such as Veterans' Day or the Lions' Christmas Dinner may have a waiting list. They try to accommodate as many seniors as possible. Councilmember Wolfe stated that the space is used wisely and they do a great job. Ms. Thompson said they are creating relationships in the community and that is what makes this program work. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 3 Mayor Lund thanked Ms. Thompson and all the volunteers for the work they do to make this program a success. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of October 23, 2006. APPROVED. NEW BUSINESS: 1. First reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 6, Commissions, of the Fridley City Code Providing for Substitute Members on the Appeals Commission. William Burns, City Manager, stated this item was tabled on August 28. The amendment would codify a long-standing policy whereby Planning Commission members are permitted to serve as substitutes for Appeals Commission members in situations when there would not be a quorum. The change will facilitate meeting the 60-day action law requirements. Staff recommends the removal of the item from the table and its approval by Council. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 2. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 114 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Abandoned Junk or Unsafe Motor Vehicles. William Burns, City Manager, stated the amendment seeks to align the City's practice for disposal of junk vehicles with the City Code. The current wording in the City Code makes reference to a City Code Enforcement Officer and to a requirement that these vehicles be sold at public auction. The changes eliminate references to the Code Enforcement Officer and make it possible to delegate the sale of the vehicle "to a duly authorized agent of the City." Staff recommends Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 3. First Reading of an Ordinance of the City of Fridley Amending Chapter 11 of the Fridley City Code by Adding a Section Requiring Compliance with all Ordinances and Laws of the City as well as the Payment of All Outstanding Fees or Charges Due the City Prior to the Issuance of any License. William Burns, City Manager, stated that the amendment allows the withholding of rental licenses from rental property owners who have delinquent utility bills. Staff recommends Council's approval. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 4 4. Resolution Certifying Certain Delinquent Utility Services to the County for Collection with the 2007 Property Taxes. William Burns, City Manager, stated the total being assessed is $235,886.08. The account holders have been notified by mail of tonight's action. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-69. 5. Resolution in Support of an Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit Application for the Lions Club of Fridley at Billiard Street Cafe Inc., d/b/a/ Two Stooges Bar and Grille, Located at 7178 University Avenue N.E. (Ward 3). William Burns, City Manager, stated that the permit is being issued to the Fridley Lions Club and expires on February 29, 2008. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-70. 6. Resolution Authorizing a New Compensation Policy and Plan. William Burns, City Manager, stated that this resolution establishes new policies with regard to salary increases, promotions, and reclassifications. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2006-71. 7. Receive the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of September 6, 2006. RECEIVED. 8. Claims (128846 — 129039). APPROVED. 9. Licenses. APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. Councilmember Bolkcom asked that Item 2 be removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda. Councilmember Lund asked that Item 1 be removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the consent agenda with the removal of Items 1 and 2. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 5 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the agenda as presented with the addition of Items 1 and 2. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM (VISITORS): Donald Anderson, 7304 W. Circle NE, thanked the police who caught the drunk driver who hit his car. Councilmember Wolfe asked residents to pay attention during the campaign to literature and signs. Signs are being stolen and this has the potential of being a Federal offense. Those caught can be fined up to $1,000 for stealing campaign signs. PUBLIC HEARING: 10. Consideration of the Assessment for Street Improvement Project No. 2005-3. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 8:53 P.M. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, stated the project assessment pertains to the construction of the cul-de-sac e�tension for development of two twin home properties following a lot split. The assessment involves eight properties for a total cost of $58,852.75. The assessment is for 10 years and the assessment rate is 6 1/2%. There will be a resolution following the public hearing related to the actual assessment of this project. Councilmember Bolkcom said that if the resolution is approved, the property owners will have 30 days to prepay the certification. A senior citizen can request deferred payment. Fred Mykkanen, 6840 Jefferson St. NE, asked how they would be billed. Mr. Pribyl stated that a final letter would be sent out to residents indicating that the assessment was certified. Residents would have 30 days to pay or it would be certified to their property taxes. Mayor Lund asked when the 30 days would start. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 6 Mr. Pribyl said tomorrow. William Burns, City Manager, said if they do not prepay the bill, it will be included in their property tax bill over the ne� 10 years. Mr. Mykkanen asked how this would affect future property assessed values. Dr. Burns said this would not be considered as added value to the home, as it is considered maintenance. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE , MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:00 P.M. 11. Consideration of the Assessment for Street Improvement Project No. 2006-1. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 9:01 P.M. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, stated this project assessment pertains to the concrete curb and gutter portion of the 2006-1 project. The total assessed cost including the driveway portion of this project is $841,274.99. The assessed cost of the street project is $17.80 per front foot as compared to the original estimate of $19.50 per foot. The assessment is for a 10-year period at 6'/z% interest. One objection was received from the homeowner at 774 Bennett Drive. The objection was on the rate of assessment, not the work relating to the corner lot. The resolution will be presented after the public hearings. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to submit into the record letters from Don and Carol Blair dated October 18, and Jeffrey and Claudia Ciesynski dated October 23. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she spoke with the Blairs regarding their driveway. She noted that going into their driveway, the bottom of the car scrapes on the bottom of the driveway. Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director, stated that Rice Creek Boulevard was raised slightly to add a crown in the road. The concrete curb and gutter that was installed along the edge of the road is a primary difference. There is no denying that there is a different feel when you drive FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 7 into it because of the concrete curb with the lip on it as opposed to a smooth formed gutter along there as there used to be with an asphalt street. He met with the Blairs and did not think there was a problem. There is not much that can be done to improve the situation. The slope of the driveway is approximately what it was. They are in agreement that there is a different feel to the driveway compared to when there was asphalt. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the Blairs appreciate everyone's efforts, but they are concerned about their driveway. They are not complaining about the assessment, but the driveway and the dip that was created. She also asked about 69th Avenue and the swale that is there. Mr. Haukaas stated that at the intersection of 69th Avenue and 69th Place, there was a water problem. Water was being held on the north side of the street and could not get to the south side of the street to continue draining down to the storm sewer. A quick fix was designed which put a sharp swale across the street to get the water out. He said they are not happy with it and are surveying the area for a redesign. It may be fixed in the spring. The contractor built the area to what was designed, as instructed, it just did not work. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what he meant when he said the contractor built it to our design. She asked if staff approved this. Mr. Haukaas stated when the grades are relatively flat, you may not always get everything perfect on paper. What may look good on paper may not be that way when it is constructed. There was not adequate time to tear this out this fall. He said they wanted to look at it and create a good solution and fix it in the spring. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it would be a city or contractor cost when it is fixed in the spring. Mr. Haukaas said it would not be a cost to the contractor. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it would be a problem with the snow plows this winter. Mr. Haukaas answered that the plows are aware of the issue and it should not be a real problem. The plows are not going at a high rate of speed when plowing the area. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the sod and driveway issues have been resolved. Mr. Haukaas stated that all the sod issues have been dealt with. They have not heard of any additional problems with sod. There are about six driveways with issues. Payment is being withheld from the contractor on those driveways until the issues are resolved. We are moving forward with the assessment tonight as this is the only opportunity to allow residents to finance their driveways through the City. If there is a dispute on a driveway and it is removed from the assessment role, the only way we can bill the property owner in the future is in full. The property owner would not be able to finance it through the city. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 8 Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the resolution needed to be passed tonight for this assessment in order to get it to the County. Mr. Pribyl stated it did. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what legal recourse the property owners have to ensure these issues will be resolved. Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, stated they can object to the assessment but the procedure is in place for them to reject the original assessment. This would preserve their right to object to the amount that is being assessed tonight. Councilmember Bolkcom said if the resident is not here tonight, they will not be able to object to the assessment. Mr. Knaak stated that residents have within 30 days of the assessment to object. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that some people who had their driveways done thought there was a cut made from the street, but if they had their entire driveway done, they are responsible for the entire driveway. Mr. Haukaas stated that the difference in what the City may have replaced generally amounts to about $200 in materials. Staff time involved in coordinating how much residents would save would far outweigh whatever the credit would be. It has been the City's policy to donate staff time to coordinate the contractors and driveways, but residents pay the full amount of the driveway. Payment will be withheld from the contractor until this issue is resolved and residents are satisfied with their driveways. Councilmember Bolkcom asked when the sod would be looked at again. Mr. Haukaas said that in the spring or late May staff will go through the entire project area and look for dead sod or sod that did not take. The contractor will be required to fix the sod and the homeowner will be responsible for watering the sod. The contractor is responsible for watering the sod for the first 30 days to get it started. After that time, it is the homeowners' responsibility. A newsletter will be sent out to residents asking them to take care of the sod. Scott Prebish, 740 Bennett Drive, came forward and stated that he did not have an issue with the assessment but the job they have done is not completed yet. He asked when it would be done. Mr. Haukaas stated that the only thing left in the project is the final layer of asphalt. The City is waiting for one good day of weather to complete this project. As for the assessment, that is associated with the installation of the concrete curb and gutter. The street portion is a City cost. The project will be done as weather permits. It is not unusual to leave the final coat of asphalt off. Many cities that have poor soil, unlike Fridley, do that as a standard practice. He said they hoped to put the final layer of asphalt down yet this year, depending on the weather. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 9 Mr. Prebish stated that after the first layer, they made a mistake and did a crown and had to come back and dig it all out. Now there is a pretty good size dip so if the project is not done before the plows come through, they will just tear up the road. Prior to the street being torn out, there was standing water near the corner. There was no drainage put in that corner, and with the dip and lower road, it will not drain correctly around the corner. Mr. Haukaas answered that the swale that was created should create cross drainage. Quincy goes to the north and turns west into Bennett Drive at that corner. The drainage flow is to the north across that intersection. That correction dealt with the water problem Mr. Prebish referred to. We do not install or e�tend storm sewer unless absolutely necessary because that is a major cost and assessed back to the residence in addition to the street project. Mr. Prebish commented on the sod issue and that the contractor was to be watering for 30 days. He said the contractor showed up for one week After that, they saw them one day the following week and have not seen them since. The first week they showed up twice a day. After 7 days, the water truck did not come any more. Mr. Haukaas said if there is a problem in the spring, the sod will need to be replaced by the contractor. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Mr. Prebish should request his area to be reviewed in the spring if there are sod issues. Jon Falldin, 201 69th Ave. NE, stated that his assessment was $6,138 and before this evening, they said it would be about $4,800. He said they replaced the curb three times and asked if that added to the increase in price. Mr. Haukaas stated that the replacement of the curb had nothing to do with any additional assessment. Mr. Falldin's driveway was done for the cost of $4,617 and the curb was $1,385. Mr. Falldin said the City put in the first 8 feet of his neighbor's driveway and they went to a private contractor to finish it. He asked if he was paying for the 8 feet plus the remainder of the driveway and how the price was figured out. Mr. Haukaas answered that the curb assessment is just for installation of the curb along the street. The driveway is for the entire driveway to the curb. Mr. Falldin asked what his cost will be. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that $1,388.40 is the cost of the curb and gutter and the driveway is $4,617. A letter will be sent out with the totals. Fred Mykkanen, 6840 Jefferson Street NE, has a problem with the patchwork by his rock box in the driveway. He understands there is a 2 year warranty. He was asking who to call for warranty work. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 10 Mr. Haukaas stated that Joe Maloney should be contacted. If there was no answer from Mr. Maloney, they should contact Layne Otteson. Mayor Lund stated that if residents were not getting satisfaction, they should contact City staff. Michael Young, 6730 Quincy Street NE, stated that he was not objecting to the assessment, but had an issue with the driveway. Mr. Maloney has been out. There is a big dip and creases where they used two different rollers. Also when the sod installer came to work on the property, he pulled up on the driveway and scuffed the driveway. They are working on the issue, but he wanted to have it on file. MOTION by Mayor Lund to accept the letter from Mr. Young regarding the concerns about his driveway. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Kelly Pogatchnik, 1531 Trapp Court (6360 Jackson Street rental property), objected to unauthorized construction and unreasonable charges from Park Construction regarding electrical repair work done during the driveway replacement at this house. On August 31, Park Construction removed the driveway except for the apron around the garage which was cement that needed to be cut off. On September 1, Park Construction had someone come out and saw off the cement portion which is when they had inadvertently cut the electrical conduit and cable running from the house to the garage. Joe Maloney called Mr. Pogatchnik and said they had cut the cable and he would have to find an electrician. Mr. Pogatchnik did not know whose responsibility it would be to fix the problem. Mr. Maloney stated that the wire was wired wrong and was not up to code. Mr. Pogatchnik told Mr. Maloney that it was his fault for cutting the cable and that his company would need to fix it. Mr. Maloney hired Kilmer Electric to fix the electrical work which started on September 11. The issue came up on October 10 when Layne Otteson called and told Mr. Pogatchnik that he would be charged for the electrical repair. On the 20th, Jon Haukaas, Mr. Pogatchnik, Kilmer Electric, and Joe Maloney met and talked about the problem. The president of Park Construction apparently talked to Jon Haukaas and proposed to pay $124.67 and Mr. Pogatchnik pay the balance of $1,000. Mr. Pogatchnik asked for the rationale behind the numbers and they responded that it was a nice round number and they were trying to be kind by giving Mr. Pogatchnik a discount. The president of Park Construction said that if it wasn't settled soon that he would turn Mr. Pogatchnik in to the Minnesota State Rental Board for having illegal wiring. He said his rental property was inspected when it was purchased and passed rental inspection. Mr. Pogatchnik proposed that he get three bids from electrical contractors in the area and that Park Construction pay the difference of the current charge to the lowest bid. He said there was no objection by Jon Haukaas at that time. He said he got three bids and they ranged from $807.90 to $350.00. He asked Council to agree that this was a reasonable and fair means to the resolution of this issue and that Park Construction split the charge. Mr. Pogatchnik offered to pay $350.00 and Park Construction pay the balance of $774.67. He asked that his $350 be added to his assessment for tax purposes. He said he did not authorize the work and did not find any authorization or quotes prior to the construction. Park Construction verbally agreed to the arrangement and he feels they are ultimately responsible for the bill. He said he FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 11 was never told by Park or the City that he would be charged for the electrical work until now. Mistakes were made that he is being charged for. Mr. Pogatchnik is uncertain as to the depth of the cable that was cut. There is enough evidence that the cable may have been improperly buried. Mr. Pogatchnik does not think the electrical work should be done for free, but that the electrical work that Kilmer Electric did was done poorly. Mr. Pogatchnik was offended by the comments that were made and asked Council for approval or recommendation. Mayor Lund said it sounds like a number of things are going on. Mr. Haukaas stated that these charges are being added to his driveway assessment as part of the work being done to install that driveway so the electrical bill is in his driveway assessment. Park Construction was essentially hired to do Mr. Pogatchnik's driveway. When they went to remove the apron, the electrical service was less than one foot deep at the bottom of the concrete apron. That is why it was cut when they tore out the apron. When a Park Construction representative called Mr. Pogatchnik, he initially said that he needed to hire an electrician; Mr. Pogatchnik responded that it was Park's problem and they needed to deal with it. As far as responsibility, Joe Maloney from Park Construction was referring to his responsibility to get an electrician. Mr. Pogatchnik was referring to responsibility to pay for the repairs. Mr. Pogatchnik would have liked more notice and an option to do the work himself if he was going to be charged for it. Park Construction waited e�tra time to get his signed contract and essentially made a special trip to do the removals. Park coordinated getting Kilmer Electric out there because they respond and get the work done when you ask them to. Part of the labor was trying to salvage what was there so they did not have to re-pour all new conduits. Kilmer Electric did fix the problem, sent the bill to Park Construction and that was passed through to Mr. Pogatchnik The total is 13 hours at $85.00 an hour plus $20.00 in materials. This should not be the taxpayers' expense and the issue is who should pay for this. Park Construction does not feel they should be responsible for doing a private driveway they were told to deal with the problem, so they did. Councilmember Barnette suggested Mr. Pogatchnik contact Anoka County Mediation Services that are available free of charge. Mayor Lund stated that Mediation Services will not help him tonight. Mr. Haukaas stated that this is a situation that Mr. Pogatchnik could take out that dollar amount of the assessment, but if he needed to pay the repair, he would need to pay that amount in full. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Mr. Pogatchnik thought Park Construction would take care of the problem and pay for it. Park Construction said they did not say they would pay for it. She questioned how they should settle the issue. Mr. Haukaas stated that Park Construction feels they acted in good faith. They got the job done and coordinated the job. There was miscommunication. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Park was doing a job for the City and cut an electrical wire, who would be responsible to pay for the repair. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 12 Mr. Haukaas stated that it would depend on the situation. Mayor Lund suggested removing $1,100 from the assessment and allow Mr. Pogatchnik to work out the differences with Park Construction. Whatever the final outcome would be, Mr. Pogatchnik would be responsible to pay the amount in full. This could be the entire amount of $1,100. Mr. Pogatchnik asked what the timeline would be on the balance. Mayor Lund answered that if the $1,100 was taken off of the assessment, Park Construction payment would be withheld as well. It would be best for a resolution to happen within 30 days. Mr. Pogatchnik stated that this is rental property and is capital dependent. If the amount was $350 to $550 he would be okay with that amount. He would not be able to pay $1,100. He said he is confident they will come to a reasonable solution based on what he has seen so far. Mayor Lund stated that the amount will be withheld from the contractor, so there should be an incentive to settle this issue. Mr. Pogatchnik would be responsible for the balance. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it would be a good idea for Mr. Pogatchnik to leave the entire amount in the assessment, and once there is a deduction it will be taken off before the final billing. That way if Mr. Pogatchnik was not able to reduce the amount, he would not have to come up with the $1,100 in full. Mr. Pribyl stated the assessment could be treated as a prepayment in the 30-day window period as long as the amount is identified in this discussion. Mayor Lund clarified that they would certify the full amount which would include the $1,100 electrical bill. If issues get resolved and the amount can be reduced, they would deduct that from the assessment by adding a prepayment. Attorney Knaak stated that it was a creative solution. If Mr. Pogatchnik is assessed the full amount, he will have to raise the objection to appeal the amount. In the meantime, this will give him some time to come to a resolution. He will need to object to the assessment tonight if he wants to appeal the amount at a later date. If a resolution is reached in 30 days, the amount would be taken off of his assessment. If an agreement is not reached, he could appeal this to the district. Councilmember Wolfe stated that if this is the best solution and everyone agrees with it, it sounded good to him. Mayor Lund asked how this would work Park Construction is not here to defend themselves. If Mr. Pogatchnik does not get resolution in 30 days, he would need to appeal to the district court which would cost $265 plus serving fees. The other alternative is to make the full assessment, the City withholds payment to Park Construction, and hopefully resolution of this matter will happen in 30 days. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 13 Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Mr. Pogatchnik will not lose anything by leaving the entire assessment in there. This would let him finance the amount over the ne�t 10 years. If we take the amount out, Mr. Pogatchnik will be responsible to pay the full amount. Mr. Pogatchnik stated that he would prefer to leave the amount in the assessment. Tom Hunt, 6700 Kennaston Drive, stated that he signed a contract that there was a one year warranty on the driveway. During the conversation tonight, people are talking about a two-year warranty. Mr. Haukaas stated he would need to check his records. Mr. Hunt stated that in the contract it explains that if there were defects, it would be warranted. The City engineer would have the final decision to fix or not fix the defects. He asked what would be under warranty under the contract. Mayor Lund advised him to see the engineer if there were defects. Councilmember Barnette stated that he spoke with Mr. Hunt on the phone and mentioned that he had a$7,000 assessment. This assessment includes the driveway. Mr. Hunt just wanted to know what would be covered under warranty and for defects and asked if the City charged an administration fee. Mr. Haukaas stated the City does not charge an administration fee. The City Engineer has the final decision in the determination of defects. The City did not see anything that needed a determination, so nothing separate was written. The warranty is for the work on the driveway. The City asked for two years and would hold the contractor to a two-year warranty. Mr. Hunt asked if he had a one or two-year contract on his driveway. Mayor Lund said there is two-year contract. Mr. Hunt stated that he still has an issue on a scar in the driveway. When the contractor came and put the curing compound on, the driveway was not entirely dry and there are some foot prints from the installer on the driveway. He can live with it but would like to see a deduction or repair. Mr. Haukaas stated that they have had a discussion with the contractor and have asked the contractor to work with the homeowner to come to a resolution and bring the solution to staff. Mr. Hunt stated that the City does not give credit for the bottom of the driveway. There is more than $200 difference. In his case it is $518. He asked for the City to take a look at it. He said he did not feel the city spent $500 in working with his driveway. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Mr. Pogatchnik wanted this objection into the record. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 14 MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to enter into the record papers dated October 23, 2006, from Kelly Pogatchnik Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Mr. Pogatchnik's $1,100 was separated in the assessment. Mr. Haukaas stated that the $1,100 is included in the cost of the driveway. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE , MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 10:20 P.M. 12. Consideration of the Assessment for Street Improvement Project No. 2006-2 MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 10:21 P.M. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, stated the project pertains to the street milling and overlay on the 2006-3 project. This project pertains to 21 properties on the Matterhorn and 73rd Avenue areas. Total assessed cost including the driveway portion is $148,141.29. Similar to the other assessments, there is a 10-year assessment period at 6'/z% interest. The resolution will follow the public hearings. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the assessment on this mill and overlay is relatively new. Mr. Haukaas replied that this is the first year of this assessment policy for mill and overlay projects. Essentially any reconstruction project that is not directly related to the installation of new concrete curb and gutter would fall under this assessment policy. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 10:23 P.M. 13. Consideration of the Assessment for the 2006 Nuisance Abatement. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 15 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 10:24 P.M. Mr. Pribyl stated that this is an annual assessment for those properties that the City has expended funds for clean-up and different work projects in accordance with the City Code. There are 30 properties involved in this assessment for a total amount of $27,994.05. This particular assessment is a one-year assessment at 6'/z% interest. The total amount of this assessment is $27,994.05. Robert Hartley, attorney for Mr. Amro at 59 Rice Creek Way, presented a statutory objection from Mr. Amro. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to submit the letter from Mr. Amro dated October 23, 2006, info the records. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Attorney Hartley stated this involves the sod in Mr. Amro's front yard. There had been discussion back and forth with the City. Mr. Amro was given an e�tension to have his front yard sod installed on June 12. The morning of June 12, City officials were at the front yard and Mr. Amro had made arrangements that he was going to go and pick up the sod. The City had also hired another company called Complete Grounds Maintenance and had arranged that company to take a preliminary look at the property and see what was needed. The morning of June 12, Mr. Amro indicated that he was going to sod the property. He had people ready to lay the sod. Mr. Amro left to get the sod and when he came back the Complete Grounds Maintenance people were there putting the sod in. Mr. Amro indicated to them to stop what they were doing. Complete Grounds Maintenance called the police, the police called the City and there was some communication back and forth. It was decided that Complete Grounds Maintenance would pick up the sod they had laid and let Mr. Amro lay the sod he picked up. Mr. Amro is being assessed $985 for sod, $250 for the initial evaluation of the property by Complete Grounds Maintenance and $975 for 13 hours of staff time. The Complete Grounds Maintenance invoice indicated that the City purchased 5 pallets of sod, started installing sod and the job was cancelled per the City. Time and materials were to be billed to the City. Mr. Amro is asking that he not pay the invoice or the $250 initial evaluation of the property. Mr. Amro is also asking for a better understanding of the 13 hours of staff time he is being billed for. Mayor Lund asked if staff had documentation of this event. Was it correct that June 12 was the last day of the e�tension and that happened to be the day that Mr. Amro decided to complete the job. Julie Jones, City Planner, distributed a time line to Council and Mr. Amro. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to enter into the record the information from Julie Jones titled 59 Rice Creek Way. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 16 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Jones stated that the deadline for completing the sod for the rear yard was June 5 and that was an earlier e�tension that was given to Mr. Amro. At that time, it was discovered that the front yard was also excavated and at that time Mr. Hickok gave Mr. Amro until June 12 to finish the front yard. When staff arrived on June 12, the sod had not been done which is why staff proceeded to have the sod installed that morning. Attorney Hartley stated that there were a couple different issues that were involved with the back yard. The back yard had its own type of issue and the front yard was separate from that. The back and side yard were dealt with in another matter. The grading and sod installation of the front yard was to be done by June 12. Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that this was an abatement which happens after a series of correspondence, time given, and deadlines set. This was a situation where a deadline was set. The rear yard had been severely excavated without the benefit of a grading or land operation permit on Mr. Amro's property. This property is on a lakeshore so Mr. Amro also needs watershed approval before he works on the property. Mr. Amro had been given a number of e�tensions. Mr. Amro agreed that anything that was not done on June 12 would be and could be completed by the City. Mr. Amro was long overdue. The last deadline had past and the City gave him one more deadline to complete the job over the weekend. Mr. Amro said when you come back on June 12, the City can complete if it is not done. On June 12, the sub grade was neatly groomed but there was no sod placed or there to be laid. Our landscape contractor had been on the site and had put sod on order because we told the contractor we would be doing an abatement if and when we got there and it was not done. The morning of June 12, Mr. Amro came to the site and asked for an e�tension until after lunch to get the front yard sod laid. The City held off and at 12:30 the contractor started to sod the yard. Mr. Amro came back and found the contractor in the yard and began throwing sod out into the street. Mr. Amro chose to order his own load of sod even though the contractor was there. Mr. Amro would have been better to just let the contractor finish the job. Mr. Amro in his haste and anger decided to order his own load of sod and have it delivered to the site. Mayor Lund commented that he was surprised that the police pulled the contractor off the job. Mr. Hickok stated that the police thought it was better to have the contractor get off the property. The police thought it was best to defuse the situation and order City staff to leave. Mayor Lund asked if Mr. Amro came to find the city staff there and then ordered the sod. Mr. Hickok stated that Mr. Amro came home mid-morning and after there was no sod by mid- morning, staff was e�tremely tolerant and allowed him until 12:30 p.m. After lunch, the sod still had not arrived. Councilmember Wolfe asked if this all happened on June 12. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 17 Mayor Lund commented that Mr. Amro was given the weekend to get the job done, nothing was done on Monday and Mr. Amro asked for an extension until lunch. Attorney Hartley answered that the sod was ordered and not delivered in the morning. The sod could not be delivered early in the morning so Mr. Amro went to pick it up. Mayor Lund asked Mr. Amro if this was what happened. Mr. Amro answered that he called Scott Hickok in the morning and told him the sod could not be delivered and asked for an e�tension until after lunch. Mr. Amro had six guys waiting to lay the sod. When the truck did not show up, Mr. Amro decided to go and get the sod. Councilmember Bolkcom asked when Mr. Amro ordered the sod for the front yard. Mr. Amro stated that he ordered the sod the same time he ordered the sod for the back yard. When the sod did not come Monday, they did what they had to do. Councilmember Bolkcom asked when the sod was supposed to be delivered. Mr. Amro replied that the sod could not be delivered on Sunday. That is why he asked for an e�tension and the City showed up on Monday to install the sod. Councilmember Bolkcom asked for clarification that the sod could not be delivered on Sunday. Mr. Amro stated that everything was ready for the delivery. He was trying to communicate but when he came back with the sod, the City had installed 4 rows of sod. He asked them to pick up the sod and leave. They did not have Mr. Amro's permission to lay the sod. Scott told him no problem; he would get them out of there. By the time the cops arrived there, 75% of the yard was done and Mr. Amro could not reach Scott. He had told Scott previously that he would have the yard ready for sod Monday and if the sod was not delivered they could do it. He did ask for an e�tension until after lunch but did not arrive back with the sod on time so the City started the job. Mayor Lund asked Mr. Amro if he thought the taxpayers should pay for the time and money spent on this issue because he waited until the last second to complete the job. Mr. Amro answered that he pulled the permit and finished the job. It was all completed. All that was left was the front yard. These are two separate issues and it took two days to complete. Mayor Lund stated that a lot more is involved. He understood that Mr. Amro was not aware he needed to pull a permit. Mr. Amro said the tree fell on the house and he wanted to remove the tree and stump. Councilmember Bolkcom commented that the back yard involved more than stump removal. The entire back yard was excavated. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 18 Mr. Amro replied that he had a bobcat remove the stumps. The City showed up and gave him a ticket. They told him he could not do excavation without a permit. He took photographs and pulled a permit and the City gave him time to complete the work The yard was ready and the building inspector came out and said he had two days to finish the job. Mr. Amro thought they should have asked when the job could be completed. He thought two days was unreasonable. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that when you get a building permit, you do not have a year to complete the work. Attorney Hartley asked to get back to the issue of the bill for the sod and City staff time. Mayor Lund stated that Mr. Amro was given ample time to do the work that was needed. Obvious code violations have taken place and there were several options to correct the problems. Mr. Amro did not take any action and this is not the first abatement and not the first time Mr. Amro has worked without permits. There is a history of code enforcement issues. Mr. Amro did more than just remove a stump. He chose to dig out the back yard and to excavate the entire yard. Mr. Amro asked for one last e�tension until noon and said if it was not done, the City could complete the work. Mr. Hickok stated that excavating the back yard on lake front property can create an erosion problem. Excavating the front yard could expand the risk of erosion. That is why the back yard and front yard are connected in this abatement process. Mayor Lund asked if Mr. Amro understood that the abatement was for the entire property, not just the back yard. Mr. Amro answered that he cut a tree down in the front yard and it looked awful. There was a huge stump in the front yard and he would need to hire a contractor to take out all the trees. There was enough soil to elevate the lawn. Mayor Lund asked what was done with the sod from Mr. Amro's lawn that was removed. Mr. Hickok answered that he was not sure what was done with the sod. Attorney Hartley stated that the contractor probably took the sod back and used it again. Mr. Hickok stated that sod farms do not take sod back once it is sold. Mr. Amro stated that he was trying to get a hold of the contractor to hold off on the sod. Mr. Hickok stated Mr. Amro asked for an e�tension until noon and that was granted. Councilmember Wolfe stated that if Mr. Amro was given an e�tension until June 12 to complete the job, June 12th ends at 11:59 p.m. If an e�tension was granted, he had the entire day to complete the job. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 19 Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Mr. Amro had a discussion with staff and said if the sod was not laid in the morning; the City could go ahead and complete the job. In the morning when the sod was not there, Mr. Amro asked if he could have until noon to get the sod. At 12:30 the City started laying the sod. Mr. Hickok stated the City understood that if it was not done by noon on June 12, the City would complete it. When no sod was delivered by 12:30, the City started the job. Mayor Lund stated that Mr. Amro made an honest attempt to take care of the yard. This certified property also has unpaid water and sewer bills. An officer had the contractor pulled off the job and the sod was not a total waste. Staff time was justified at $975 and the pre-visit from the contractor for $250 in services are legitimate charges. The $980 sod bill could be retracted. Mayor Lund suggested Mr. Amro pay the entire bill less the $980 for the sod. This is an e�tremely generous offer on behalf of the City. In addition, Council would ask for Mr. Amro to pay his utility bill. Mr. Amro replied that he feels his property is being picked on because his neighbors' yards are also not in good shape. Mayor Lund answered that if he had a legitimate complaint, he should ask staff to look into the situation. Mr. Hickok stated that they are not treating Mr. Amro any different than any other abatement process. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that this is a different situation because he was excavating the entire back yard potentially creating a hazard to Locke Lake and the Mississippi. This is a different situation but an honest mistake. The neighbors had even asked Mr. Amro to stop digging. Mayor Lund proposed that the bill be deducted for the sod and to split the administration costs. Councilmember Bolkcom asked why we would split the administration charges. Mr. Amro should be responsible to pay the penalties and staff time. He had ample time to fix the situation and he should not have waited until the last minute to resolve the issue. The original e�tension was until June 5. It was then e�tended to June 12 and then until noon on June 12. City staff should not have to be taking care of his property. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 11:37 P.M. Mayor Lund stated that the delinquent $688 in utility bills will be assessed to the property taxes if not paid in full. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 20 Mr. Amro asked why the City added $250 for an automatic reader meter. Mayor Lund stated that Mr. Amro was charged repeated times because a reader needed to be sent to the property to read the meter. The new meter can be read from the street. A card is sent out to residents, they must fill out the card with the meter reading before the water bill is paid. The utility bill is certified to add to the bill and will charge $250 for auto reader for people who do not pay on time or do not send in meter readings. NEW BUSINESS: 14. Resolution Adopting Assessment for Street Improvement Project No. 2005-3 Motion by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2006-72. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 15. Resolution Adopting Assessment for the 2006 Street Improvement Project No. 2006-1 Motion by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the Resolution No. 2006-73. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 16. Resolution Adopting Assessment for the 2006 Street Improvement Project No. 2006-2. Motion by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2006-74. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 17. Resolution Adopting Assessment for the 2006 Nuisance Abatement Motion by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the resolution for the 2006 abatement amending the assessment for 59 Rice Creek Way to $1,777.50. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 114 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Abandoned Junk or Unsafe Motor Vehicles. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006 PAGE 21 MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the ordinance and adopt the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 6, Commissions, of the Fridley City Code Providing for Substitute Members on the Appeals Commission. Mayor Lund stated that this item did not have formal motion to remove it from the table. MOTION by Mayor Lund to remove this item from the table. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Mayor Lund to waive the reading of the ordinance and adopt the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 18. Informal Status Reports Mayor Lund stated that the League of Women's Voters will meet Thursday, October 26 at the Community Center at 7:00 p.m. Julie Jones, City Planner, stated that the last recycle drop off is Saturday, October 28. If you have any questions, see the city website or call 572-3594. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to adjourn. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:43 P.M. Respectfully Submitted by, Krista J. Monsrud Scott Lund Recording Secretary Mayor