01/04/2010 - 29274CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF FRIDLEY
JANUARY 4, 2010
The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund
Councilmember-at-Large Barnette
Councilmember Saefke
Councilmember Varichak
Councilmember Bolkcom
OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager
Fritz Knaak, City Attorney
James Kosluchar, Public Works Director
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director
Steve and Sue Schmit, 92 — 43rd Avenue NE
LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION UPDATE:
Senator pon Betzold stated the legislative session will start on February 4. This is the second
year of the two-year cycle. Issues that did not get resolved last year do carry over into the
second year. The second year dies at the end of this session and a two-year cycle will start next
year after the election. This year the focus is going to be on the budget. Last year in the odd-
numbered year, as they always do, they set the two-year budget which started last July 1 and will
go through June 30, 2011. The legislature passed a balanced budget. It had a tax component
which the Governor vetoed. He also used his unallotment authority to shift the negative balance,
but it did balance at the end. Now we have the economic forecast from November which told us
that, although it balanced last spring, the spending track is where it was anticipated, but the
revenues are not.
Senator Betzold said for this current biennium, they are anticipating there will be about a$1.2
billion shortfall by June 3, 2011. There will be another forecast coming out in February, and
those will be the hard numbers that they will be working on. The Governor is going to make his
proposals about mid-January as to how to adjust the current problem. It gets worse because they
also look to the following biennium, the one that is going to start on July 1, 2011. They are
projecting by the end of that biennium there will be a$5 billion deficit. There was a$5 billion
deficit for the last biennium, too.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 2
Senator Betzold stated there were no budget reserves left at the end. The Governor used his
authority to shift some K-12 funding in the next biennium and also pulled some programs. A
lawsuit was filed in Ramsey County over a small part of the unallotment. The judge ruled that
the Governor exceeded his authority and that it was unconstitutional for him to use unallotment
authority at the start of the budget process. The Governor said he is going to appeal the decision.
He said he did not anticipate a quick court decision.
Representative Carolyn Laine stated the unallotment by the Governor included the GAMC
(General Assistance Medical Care) Program. This will not be held up by the courts. The GAMC
has been worked on in the meantime to come up with a solution. There will also probably be a
school shift that will have to be done. They also have the end of the year problem where more
money is needed to be found because it did not come in. This is a very serious time for
Minnesota.
Representative Kate Knuth stated the budget is clearly the big issue on the table, and she
thinks as elected officials when they talk about what this deficit means and why it is there, it is
really important to understand what is underlying it. One key statistic about the $1.2 billion
shortfall that they learned about in November, early December, is that 70 percent of the revenue
decline is an income tax revenue decline. People are working fewer hours, they are not working,
or they are getting paid less. First, that says something about our tax system which we need to
be working on to make less volatile. Second, we need to put Minnesotans back to work Part of
the way they will do that this session is the bonding bill. She thinks there is a big desire to get
the bonding bill out as quickly as possible in order to get more of those projects let this
upcoming summer. There will be a strong component of the bonding bill making sure that we
are funding projects that are ready to go now or by this summer so we can put people to work
then.
Representative Knuth stated she works a lot on energy and climate issues, which is a bright
spot in our economic and jobs future. This will be important as it is one of the few sectors that
has actually grown over the last couple years.
Senator Betzold stated he chairs the legislative commission on pensions and retirement which
consists of five members of the House and five members of the Senate. Their job is to put
together pensions which will ultimately go through the legislative process. It is quite clear that
the major funds, including PERA, are in rough shape because of the loss in the stock market and
the economy. Even if the stock market were to rebound and have great returns for the next 30
years, they are not sure they can make up the losses they have suffered. It looks like they are
going to be coming in with a proposal which would include a combination of
employer/employee contribution increases as well as some cost of living freeze or modest cost of
living increase for the current retirees. Everybody affected by pensions is going to wind up
being affected by this. Of course employer contribution is something that certainly would be
very difficult for most local governments to figure out how to pay. Many employees who have
had wage freezes, if they wind up being told they have to give more to their pensions, it actually
is a pay cut. They are just now getting into those things and will be talking about those over the
next few weeks.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 3
Mayor Lund asked if the legislators expect to see increased lawsuits for the return of
unallotment funds.
Senator Betzold replied it is quite probable that other groups that are affected by it will want to
join in the lawsuit. He thinks they just have to assume that everything is declared
unconstitutional, not just the small programs that have been ruled on. The Governor has said he
is going to appeal. There is probably a way to fast track it, bypass the Court of Appeals, and go
to the Supreme Court. It is possible the Supreme Court could expedite the arguments, issue
some sort of decision, and say the formal opinion will follow later. They are very early in that
process. Nothing happens quickly when you are dealing with those kinds of issues especially at
the appellate court level.
Mayor Lund stated they all recognize the major issue at the State Capitol this year will be the
budget and the continuing deficits. Will they have an expectation that there still will be capital
bonding this year? Will there be money set aside for capital improvement projects?
Senator Betzold replied, yes. In fact their desire is probably to get the thing out within the first
week or so. They will see hearings at the Capitol, even though they cannot formally vote on
things until the session starts. The various committees will be meeting in January to kind of
make the recommendations to the capital investments committee and the House and the Senate
so that when they start the session off they have everything locked down and ready to go. He
thinks that is one of the first bills they will see passing through the session.
Senator Satveer Chaudary stated they are going to have quite a difficult three months, and it
may possibly go longer because they have to find all this money and have a sound debate on
what should be cut if anything. Then if the unallotment dollars are reallotted, they have to find
an additional billion or so dollars as well. It is really going to preoccupy their minds and, at the
same time, they cannot let their focus be distracted from trying to establish an improved
economy in Minnesota. That is related to our capital investments jobs bonding bill. This is the
time when they especially need to do that, provide jobs, and make sure that money is circulating
within our economy and restimulated where people are able to work It is very, very critical that
they pass the bonding bill, provide good jobs, and they do it as soon as possible.
Councilmember Barnette asked about the racino issue.
Senator Chaudary replied the racino issue has come up at least every biennium since he has
been in the legislature. He said he does not think the money would come close at all to solving
our budget deficit, and it probably would not even come close to paying for a stadium. It will
probably come up again. Senator Day was the main proponent in the Senate resigned to
primarily lobbying for it. He does not see his own position changing for it although he is always
willing to listen.
Senator Chaudhary stated although he has not read the judge's unallotment order, he thinks the
key issue may be whether that order stated that the unallotment or the proceedings were stayed
pending any possible appeal. He says that because there is a temporary junction issued that
money has to be returned, and the legislative process has to be honored. During appeal,
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 4
depending on how fast that is, whatever money was ordered to be returned could be spent and the
issue regarding that particular unallotment rendered moot, if that money is spent before the final
appeal is decided, unless the order said it is all frozen until appeal. He had a new initiative,
partially unallotted, regarding sustainable design providing cities assistance in providing new
ways to design construction projects to use less water, focus on health standards and provide
training for cities.
Representative Tillberry stated there will be a bonding bill. It is just a matter of what the
Senate decides, the House decides, and the Governor decides and how it eventually gets figured
out.
Representative Laine stated the bonding bill is the only way that Minnesota as a state could
actually encourage jobs. The federal government has other ways. It is the key focus of this
session. Looking at somewhere around $1 billion, and she just today reinitiated the Springbrook
piece of that at a$3 million amount. Regarding the unallotment, the only one that stays is that
little bit for those people who had emergency food assistance for their disability. That is the only
one that has the money returned at this time. Her understanding is that some of the bigger
players, like the cities and counties, are not necessarily looking at going forward.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated there probably will not be unallotment until it this is resolved,
so we hope to get our next payment.
Representative Laine replied, you have to recognize that now when they have come to this out
of session, end of year time, the Governor actually could legally unallot for this $1.2 billion
deficit.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated but then she thinks that would force the City to file a suit
against them.
Mayor Lund stated even if they got it back there is always a cut to the LGA and ultimately that
may go away altogether in 2010.
Williams Burns, City Manager, stated last year they set up an LGA study committee as they got
underway on October 15 and he sat in on the meeting as part of the audience. He was unable to
get on the committee after he asked to be on it. He noticed there were 11 members on that
committee, two chairs, Rod Skoe and Paul Marquart, both from greater Minnesota. He noticed
that only two of the representatives were from suburbs, Linda Scheid (a state representative), and
Ann Norris (city manager from Crystal). He asked if there was anything they can do to get better
representation for suburban governments on the committee? They meet again about the third
week in January. Last time he seriously looked at the LGA, about 5 percent is distributed to
suburban cities, the rest of it is carved out between the greater Minnesota and the two core cities.
It seems to him there needs to be some fairness here with regard to this study committee.
Senator Betzold stated he did not know how often they are planning a meeting but, now that
they are already there and to add more people onto it, they would have to go back and start
getting all those new people. Typically that is not how they like to do things over there. Frankly
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 5
he is not sure of the composition of the House. He knows Representative Tillberry is on the
House task committee. They are actually shy on people, at least senior people, on the Senate tax
committee. He used to be on it but then when he became a budget chair, they have this policy
that if you are chairing part of the budget, you cannot be on the tax committee, because you
cannot appropriate and spend the money at the same time. That forced him off the tax committee
and yet they actually lost a number of senior suburban legislators of both parties as a result of
some of those shifts. They actually had to get Representative Scheid on the committee last year
so they had more suburban representation. He thinks she does a good job. When she was in the
House she was on the House tax committee. She is quite a vocal advocate for the suburbs.
Senator Chaudary stated he trusts Representative Scheid, too, but if Dr. Burns is interested,
some of them could co-author a letter with him to the councilmembers, to the commission, just to
say exactly what he just said where we are "X" percent of the LGA, you want to emphasize we
are here, our interests are represented, etc.
Dr. Burns replied he would appreciate that very much. The suburban legislators make up about
a third of them in the State Legislature. Yet they are underrepresented on this group. He thinks,
if they are going to come up with an LGA formula that has credibility and obj ectivity, it needs to
have a little bit better suburban representation. They only had one meeting. Most of it was
devoted to Pat Dalton and her staff talking about the history of LGA. They have not gotten into
any formal decision-making. It is not like there is a lot to be undone by adding one or two more
representatives.
Senator Chaudary replied, that is fine. They can talk about that but also keep in mind in the
context that a study commission is the very beginning of any process and any proposal that is not
acceptable will more than likely not be acceptable to that one-third of actual legislators who are
actually voting on any proposal.
Dr. Burns replied, he knows but it would be nice to get it in the beginning.
Senator Chaudhary asked what the citizens of Fridley were saying. What are they concerned
about? How is the commuter rail station going, etc.?
Mayor Lund replied, from the limited comments that he has about the Northstar is people like it.
He does not think it is being well utilized in Fridley. He primarily bases that on looking at the
parking lot. It is not anywhere close to being more than a quarter full at best. He thinks it is
going to take time for that and also once people get acclimated to using it, it will become more
like second nature.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated she thinks the big thing is that it does not run often enough for
people in Fridley. Also, there is no overnight parking.
Mayor Lund stated also people in general are struggling financially and they do not want to see
an increase in taxation of any sort. They see increases already in their tax statements even
though their valuations are going down.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 6
Senator Chaudary asked what they can do to help with the foreclosure issue.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked wouldn't the TIF issue help? Scattered site?
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated they do have a piece of legislation
about scattered site acquisition they had before the legislature. They will be bringing that back
to the legislature that would allow the City to buy scattered site housing units across the City and
to basically have those be in housing districts so we can benefit by having those in there as well.
That would be a continuation of a program that we had through the year 2005. It was a very
successful program, but it expired. Not only did we see it being very successful but, as the
Legislature looked at it last session, it seemed that there was a lot of enthusiasm about it. In fact
in the committee that we were before, they felt that it should be statewide, not just Fridley. It
was not just the group of communities in there with Fridley that were asking for that. But for
Ann Rest not being there at a session, he thinks it would have been passed in the last session.
Fridley is very interested in having that revisited and having that come back in this session.
Senator Chaudary stated he did not realize it had expired because he can remember working on
this he thinks for Columbia Heights in 1997 and Fridley was already in or was it the other way
around?
Mr. Hickok replied, Fridley was in.
Senator Chaudary stated, yes, he thinks it should be extended. He agrees that was very helpful.
Dr. Burns stated it started out as a piece of special legislation from Fridley and he thinks it
became a statewide piece of legislation ultimately as it found its way through the process but,
because of the time limits, we did not get it done. We were encouraged and thought there was
some chance of it happening in this next legislative session.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated one other thing would be some type of loan program. People
like to buy foreclosed homes but anybody who is really struggling and the amount of money you
have to have to get a mortgage nowadays is incredible, 20-30 percent, and they are not willing to
loan that money to someone who is going into a foreclosed home that is in pretty bad shape that
needs work but they need the materials to make the home better. If there is some other program
out there besides the scattered site that would help people in that sense.
Councilmember Saefke stated when they were setting our levies this year, it turned out that the
State levy limit actually held us back and most of us know with the City Charter the City is
limited with what it can do. This year the State actually provided the City less of a chance to
increase our levy limit than our own restriction in our Charter. One of the reasons for that is the
confusion that seemed to be down at the State level because when Mr. Pribyl called down there
and the difference in what he had to include for setting a limit between what our LGA was going
to be or certified for and what we actually got and that was the difference.
Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director/Treasurer, stated actually that was very early in the budget-
setting process for us and because of the unallotment and also the levy limits they had not
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 7
actually been able to, in that point of time, really define how the levy limit was going to be set.
They really did not have anything in writing at that point as far as that levy limit so we were
actually just trying to anticipate and calculate what the limit would be.
Councilmember Saefke asked if that was a State problem.
Mr. Pribyl replied he would not really say it was an issue at the State. This was the first year we
had to deal with this situation with unallotment and levy limits so it was more of a timing issue
with our budget, as early as we actually get into this process and trying to anticipate what our tax
levy would be for the year 2010.
Dr. Burns stated the bigger issue though is the State levy limit. That is the one that the City
could use the help with.
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of December 7, 2009
APPROVED.
City Council Meeting of December 14, 2009
APPROVED.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Receive the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of December 16, 2009.
RECEIVED .
2. Resolution Imposing Load Limits on Public Streets in the City of Fridley,
Minnesota.
William Burns, City Manager, stated this resolution imposes load limits on City streets. The
load limits are pretty much initiated by the State's Commissioner of Transportation. Staff
recommends Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-01.
3. Resolution Designating Official Depositories for the City of Fridley.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 8
William Burns, City Manager, stated in view of our satisfaction with the services offered by
Wells Fargo Bank, staff recommends that Council appoint them as the City's official depository
for 2010.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-02.
4. Resolution Designating an Official Newspaper for the Year 2010.
William Burns, City Manager, stated staff recommends the designation of the Sun Focus News
as the official legal newspaper and the Minneapolis Star Tribune as the second official
newspaper for the City of Fridley for the year 2010.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-03.
5. Resolution Authorizing a Change in the Mileage Reimbursement Rate for the 2010
Calendar Year.
William Burns, City Manager, stated the resolution adopts the 2010 IRS mileage reimbursement
rate. It changes the rate from .505 per mile to .500 per mile. Staff recommends Council's
approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-04.
6. Resolution Establishing Procedures Relating to Compliance with Reimbursement
Bond Regulations under the Internal Revenue Code.
Dr. Burns stated the resolution authorizes the Finance Director to create a declaration of intent
to use the proceeds and general obligation bonds to reimburse the City for costs associated with
various reconstruction proj ects. The proj ects include the 2009 street reconstruction program, the
2010 street reconstruction program, and the 2010 water system improvements. The resolution
has been prepared by the City's bond council and will enable us to comply with IRS regulations.
Staff recommends Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-05.
7. Approve 2010 Animal Control Contract between the City of Fridley and Brighton
Veterinary Hospital.
Dr. Burns stated Fridley has been contracting with Brighton Veterinary Hospital to provide
animal impound services since 1997. The contract before them tonight raises the fee for these
services from $1,200 per month to $1,500 per month. This is the first fee increase since 2004.
The City has been very happy with the services provided by Brighton and does not see a viable
alternative. Staff recommends Council's approval.
APPROVED.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 9
8. Approve 2010 City Council and Staff Appointments.
Dr. Burns stated the list includes the appointment of Mayor Pro Tem Bob Barnette. Staff
recommends Council's approval of the appointments.
APPROVED.
9. Claims (144516 —144692)
APPROVED.
10. Licenses
APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE.
11. Estimates
G. L. Contracting, Inc.
4300 Willow Drive
Medina, MN 55430-9701
45th Avenue Outfall Proj ect No. 390
Estimate No. 2 ................................................ $ 33,100.3 8
APPROVED.
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the consent agenda. Seconded by
Councilmember Varichak.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA:
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the agenda. Seconded by Councilmember
Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
OPEN FORUM:
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Kosluchar what is happening with the school safety issue
Ms. Olson brought up a couple of weeks ago.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 10
James Kosluchar, Public Works Director, stated he and Don Abbott discussed it last week.
They have been monitoring the situation and looking at some method of suitable signing. It is
not real standard to use private u-turn signage on a two-way street such as that. They actually
have a meeting with Duane Knealing from School District 14 on Tuesday. They should see
some resolution in the next couple of weeks.
Councilmember Saefke asked if they have had any discussions regarding traffic control people.
Mr. Kosluchar stated he and Don Abbott have talked about that internally, but they have not yet
discussed that with the school. Mr. Knealing provided them with a copy of the School District's
circulation plan.
Councilmember Saefke asked about whether they have adult crossing guards.
Councilmember Barnette stated he did not believe they have crossing guards at Stevenson
other than boarding the buses, etc.
Councilmember Saefke asked if a CSO could be assigned there during the school hours when
these problems are occurring.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated the problem she has with that is the City does not have enough
staff the way it is. It is the school's problem.
Dr. Burns stated he agreed that it is more of an organizational issue than an enforcement issue.
The City did tag an individual for making a u-turn there, and our Police Department has been
watching the situation carefully.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Kosluchar if he would e-mail them at some point or
provide the information in their packet.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
12. Consideration of Text Amendment Request, TA #09-02, by Schmit Towing, Inc., to
Add Language to the M-1, Light Industrial Zoning District, that would Allow
Towing Services by a Special Use Permit, Generally Located at 92 — 43rd Avenue
N.E. (Ward 3).
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and
open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:23
P.M.
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated the petitioner is seeking a text
amendment to add language to the M-1, Light Industrial Zoning District. This would allow
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 11
towing services, by issuance of a special use permit. In addition, the petitioner is requesting a
special use permit to allow a towing service business in the M-1, Light Industrial Zoning
District, located at 92 — 43rd Avenue which will be before the City Council when the text
amendment has its second reading on February 8.
Mr. Hickok stated the subject property is 1.99 acres and was developed in 1963 with the
construction of an 8,234 square foot building. In 1982 a shed was constructed on the property as
well. In 1989 a special use permit was issued to a landscape business to allow outdoor storage of
landscape materials and construction vehicles on this site.
Mr. Hickok stated Schmit Towing has been operating a towing service business out of the
subj ect property since 2006. They primarily tow and transport vehicles for dealerships,
municipalities, and the general public. There was a special use permit for outdoor activities on
this site, but it was not specific to the towing business. That is what the Council is considering at
this time.
Mr. Hickok stated according to the petitioner, "Ninety percent of our business is towing and
transporting vehicles off site, not to our site. Occasionally it is necessary to keep said vehicles in
our lot for a limited period of time; however, most vehicles are gone within 48 hours. A few
times a year a vehicle may be on site for up to 45 days at the most. We do not perform junkyard
service, nor do we dispose of vehicles on our property. Vehicles are picked up by the owner,
picked up or towed for an insurance company, or towed to an appropriate disposal facility."
Mr. Hickok stated it recently came to the City's attention that this type of business is not
allowed in an M-1, Light Industrial Zoning District. As a result, the petitioner is seeking the
proposed text amendment. The petitioner is requesting a text amendment to add language to the
M-1 zoning district which would allow towing services by special use permit. The City currently
does not allow this exact use in any of the zoning districts within the City. The Code does,
however, allow junkyards, repair garages, and other intense types of uses within our industrial
districts with a special use permit.
Mr. Hickok stated the Future Land Use Map in the City's Comprehensive Plan guides the
subject and the surrounding properties as redevelopment. The intent would be for these
properties to remain industrial. The purpose of including it within the redevelopment area was
intended to suggest that there may be a need for updating many of our industrial properties that
are located in this general area. Industrial uses typically involve wholesaling, warehousing,
manufacturing, construction, or services uses. While the proposed use is not as intensive as
many of those industrial uses that would be permitted in this zoning district, the proposed use
would fit best within the industrial district as is being suggested.
Mr. Hickok stated the petitioner's business is located at 92 — 43rd Avenue and it is zoned M-1,
Light Industrial. Of particular importance when considering this text amendment is determining
if the proposed use would be consistent with the purpose and intent of the zoning district in
which it would become allowable and whether or not the proposed use would be compatible with
other permitted or special uses allowed in that same district.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 12
Mr. Hickok stated based on the businesses surrounding the existing business it seems very
reasonable that this type of business would exist without causing disruption to the neighboring
properties. Staff finds that towing service use where the principal use is to tow, impound, and
store motor vehicles would be consistent with the purpose and intent of the M-1 zoning district
provided specific conditions are met, those conditions and how the petitioner plans to meet them,
are analyzed as follows:
(a) The storage aspect of said towing service operating shall be secondary, in terms of
use, to a principal building that houses a towing office, repair/maintenance facility
for towing fleet, and an interior storage area for a portion of the impounded
collection of vehicles. The existing building is used for office, storage of
vehicles, and light maintenance of the towing vehicles. The storage of towed
vehicles is considered secondary to the principal use, the building on the
property.
(b) The towing service site shall be located on a street with traffic volumes of less
than 1,500 ADT (average daily trips). Forty-Third Avenue only averages about
900 trips per day. The reason for this condition is allowing this type of use on a
road that has limited daily trips eliminates the potential for vehicle conflict
between typical traffic and large commercial towing vehicles.
(c) No storage of impounded or other vehicles associated with towing service
business shall be parked on street(s) adjacent to towing service facility. The
petitioner has stated they currently do not allow vehicles of any type to be
parked on the street, so they have no problem complying with this condition.
This would be monitored yearly by staff.
(d) All storage shall be located in the side or rear yard of the towing service facility.
Storage of towed vehicles is already being done in the side or rear yarc� The
business trailers that are currently in the front yard will be moved to the rear
yard and not stored there in the future.
(e) All areas where vehicles are to be driven, towed or parked shall be surfaced with
either asphalt or concrete and those parking areas shall have concrete curb and
gutter of B6-12 standard or suitable alternative, approved by the City Engineer,
surrounding their perimeter. Already completed on this site.
(� Areas where stored vehicles are intended to be parked shall be fenced, screened
and adequately lit from sunset to sunrise for security purposes. Lighting shall
only include shielded downcast fixtures. The area where vehicles are currently
being stored is already fenced in. The petitioner does plan to add an additional
fence this spring between the east side of the building and the east property line,
for additional security purposes. The site is screened through the use of
existing landscaping. Existing lighting on the site is shielded with downcast
fixtures.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 13
(g) Parking stalls intended for storage of towed vehicles and towing truck fleet shall
be separated from those required by Code for customers and employees.
Employee and customer stalls can be in the side yard or front yard, but shall not
be within the fenced area intended for towed or impounded vehicles, or the
towing fleet. The site meets code requirements for parking and the rest of this
condition is already being me�
(h) No intercom system shall be used in the open yard area if site is directly adjacent
to residentially zoned property. Petitioner has read and agrees with this
condition.
(i) No crushing, dismantling, or salvage of vehicles shall occur on the subject
property. This is something that the petitioner is agreeable to, but will be
required to be monitored by staff yearly.
(j) All towing operations whose storage yard is within 250 feet of a residential
dwelling at the time of issuance of the special use permit, shall be required to
have limited hours of yard operation, similar to the City's hours of power tool use
and construction, which are 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 9:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Saturday. The nearest residential property is 660 feet from the
subject property.
(k) Towing services shall not be located within a multi-tenant industrial complex.
The subject property is a freestanding building.
Mr. Hickok stated the reason for stipulation (k) is when a multi-tenant building has been
designed for a certain amount of parking to accommodate those multitude of tenants, you do not
want that parking to then be consumed by vehicles that are being brought back to the site by the
towing operation.
Mr. Hickok stated while conducting an on-site inspection, staff noticed that the petitioner's
freestanding sign appears to be within the public right-of-way. The petitioner did articulate to
staff that their property line actually extends into the street. This is one of those rare times where
the property line is not outside of the roadway but actually out in the center of the roadway. As a
result their sign location is okay. It does not present any sort of danger where it is.
Mr. Hickok stated staff also reviewed the site to ensure that parking demands will be met as
well as landscaping requirements. It is a very nice looking site and it has been well maintained
and well landscaped.
Mr. Hickok stated the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval
of TA #09-02 on December 16, and their motion carried unanimously. Staff recommends
concurrence with the Planning Commission. The next steps would be the first reading of an
ordinance on January 25 and second reading of an ordinance and special use permit review on
February 8.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked what business trailers were.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 14
Mr. Hickok replied they do in this particular business haul specialty/expensive vehicles which
are towed inside an enclosed trailer, rather than on a flatbed or towed behind a typical towing
type vehicle.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked regarding Stipulation (h), it just says if it is adjacent to a
residentially zoned property, the nearest one is 660 feet in this one. She asked what it meant to
be adjacent.
Mr. Hickok said the City would have very few M-1 properties that would be able to have that
distance, 250 feet, between a dwelling unit that is zoned residential and the business itself. We
want to protect those businesses. In the event they were closer to 250 feet, they could not use the
yard intercom because we would not want that to be disruptive to adjacent property. In this case
they are well over that. In another M-1 property, if you have anything less than 250 feet, not
only would they have that intercom restriction, they would have a yard use restriction. This was
not done with any sort of malice, but it was done with a purpose. There needs to be yard control
and, if it is really close to residential, the backing of trucks, beeping of trucks, towing of vehicles
in and out of a site, really probably cannot happen and co-exist with the residential nearby. So
here again it is going to be a rare M-1 site where this is going to be permitted. Staff put the
standards in there specifically to limit it to sites where it actually does work.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked so why does it not just say 250 vs. directly adjacent? Is that
not left up to interpretation? The reason she is bringing it up is over on Ashton, where there are
some industrial properties, she hears occasionally from the neighbors there about the intercom.
Those people are further away but they complain about the noise from the intercom and backing
of trucks, etc.
Mr. Hickok stated if Council felt so compelled, that language could be taken out.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the reason "Sunday" was not included in Stipulation (j) was
that the City does not allow any activity on Sunday.
Mr. Hickok replied, correct. The petitioner would not be restricted to that because they are not
within that distance but, if you were, that might be a factor that would cause a towing operation
to not want to be there. They could not tow on Sunday. That would probably be unworkable for
them. They would not see a towing service less than 250 feet from a residence.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated her other concern is they can basically tow any time of the day
or night. Backing up and beeping noises which she believes would carry more at night. There is
a neighborhood which, granted, is a ways away from there, but there will be towing and up and
down the street. There will be big vehicles going in and out. She asked what their hours of
operation were.
Mr. Hickok replied, he believe they have quite a broad timeframe in which you can pick up your
vehicle. From what he understands they do have evening staff as well as daytime staff. He
thinks it is possible for someone to come later into the evening to pick up his or her vehicle.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is residential property there. There are some concerns
about some of the other properties that are further north of Main Street, and they are even closer.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 15
Some of that activity at some of those businesses is present, and a lot of those businesses are not
open 24/7.
Mr. Hickok said Schmit Towing has been in operation for a couple years, and the City has not
heard one complaint about any aspect of this business at all.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated but, again, this is not just related to them. Someone else could
come along and do this in another neighborhood where they might be in a closer proximity and
maybe there is no property like that right now. Maybe we should feel comfortable because there
also still has to be a special use permit, so if there were issues related to another business like
this, they could look at it.
Mr. Hickok stated that is exactly why this should not just be a text amendment. It should also
be a special use permit. As with all special use permits, staff will review them on an annual
basis and, if there is a problem, either there needs to be adjustments to the stipulations or it is
possible that if it is proven they cannot co-exist with residential, then the special use permit
would go away. He thinks the protection is built in through the special use permit, and it is not
just meant to be a pure text amendment that allows it by right.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated but on the other hand, if they are complying with all the
stipulations, but it does not co-exist with the neighborhood and there are complaints, it might be
legally hard for the City to say they cannot have the special use permit anymore.
Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, replied if they are complying with the terms of the special use
permit, you cannot pull the permit.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated if they are complying, the City could have a potential problem,
not necessarily with this business but another business.
Mr. Hickok stated that is the purpose of a special use permit where you could not revoke it if
they are complying with all these things. There is also the annual review that talks about impacts
and reviews and analyzes whether the impacts are beyond the stipulations in the special use
permit. Certainly they have that review opportunity to bring that item back before Council and
discuss what impact it is to a neighborhood. He does not think any business in this situation
would find themselves saying, look, we are going to continue doing it regardless. He thinks
upon review, the City Council, we would see corrective measures being taken. He thinks there is
quite a healthy list of stipulations that are meant to protect precisely what the Council is
concerned about.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that is her only point is that they have to really look at this and
make sure they have all the terms that would protect people that live close to the properties.
Councilmember Saefke stated he does not have any problem with this particular special use
permit, but he does agree with Councilmember Bolkcom that if it is applying to all future ones,
they would have the opportunity to take into consideration the neighborhood any of them would
be going into before they issue a special use permit. That is why they have special use permits,
so they can take a look at certain aspects of any business or any use on a property and have the
opportunity to make additional stipulations if necessary.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 16
Mayor Lund stated those businesses who are preexisting are going to have a problem with this.
He asked how many other towing companies were in Fridley.
Mr. Hickok replied, one. It is actually a towing company; and it is not in an M-1 district.
Mayor Lund asked is that Northeast Towing?
Mr. Hickok replied, yes, and it is a preexisting non-conformance. It is actually in a commercial
district.
Mayor Lund asked what the zoning was at Gary's Automotive.
Mr. Hickok replied, C-2, General Business.
Mayor Lund stated the issue that he has is a couple of these elements is if they were to agree
with these, and these become part of the ordinance and becomes conducive to any other
facilities, he thinks it actually puts Northeast Towing out of business.
Mr. Hickok replied, that is a different zoning and it is a preexisting non-conforming use there.
It would not be able to come back and relocate there in the future. If it were to find a new
location in Fridley, it would need to find an M-1 location. It would not be an ideal spot for a
towing business anymore.
Mr. Hickok stated they did have one other in an M-1, that was in the Sam's Auto operation
building, which is a multi-tenant building. For all sorts of reasons that did not work there and
would not work there according to these standards. We have one other business that is a service
operation which has a tow truck in case they need to bring somebody back to their garage. That
is on the corner of Osborne Road and Highway 65. They had a fleet there at a point. The City
reminded them that, although they were preexisting, and have had a tow truck back from the time
they began service, they are not going to let that evolve into a towing service there because
frankly that comes with their fleet, vehicles on the site that they have not planned for and other
things. They have now brought it back to one tow truck.
Mayor Lund stated some of the elements might be a little restrictive given the fact that if it does
not affect current non-conformance. He asked if the City is now asking Northeast Towing for a
$1,500 towing permit and if they would then come under the stipulations.
Mr. Hickok replied, it is still being evaluated. After a lot of discussion/analysis/research on
that, staff has come to a conclusion they were a towing business years ago. They cannot
geographically expand it, but they also are not likely to get a special use permit. They just need
to know they are preexisting, non-conforming, and they need to continue their operation the way
they have. If they wanted to expand they would need to move to a different site, and M-1 would
allow them that. It will be hard though to find an M-1 site. Staff has also done analysis and
applied these stipulations to an M-1 site because they needed to find a place to allow towing in
the City; but it could not be in every M-1 site.
Mayor Lund stated he thinks M-1 is not going to do it. He recalled when Citywide moved into
Fridley, the first thing he did is contact City Hall and see if that would be permissible in an M-1
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 17
and it was. Now, upon review, staff is coming to Council and saying we want a number of
stipulations here and identifying M-1 as acceptable with a lot of stipulations, one of them being
okay with a multi-tenant industrial complex. There are a number of those facilities in Fridley
where there are multi-tenants. In fact, Citywide very successfully operated in Fridley for a
number of years, and there were three tenants in that building. Although they were pretty much
strictly AAA where rarely they had vehicles there and they had limited space for parking.
Mr. Hickok replied it is a different business, and staff has done so much analysis of that site and
determined a lot of that storage is for the car repair portion. They had a tow truck related to the
business which they grew up with basically and became a preexisting non-conforming use there.
They are very different though and, if you were to compare them with the Schmit operation, you
would see it by the size of the fleet, the amount of towing that they do.
Mayor Lund stated it kind of rubs him the wrong way that they are redefining by ordinance our
towing operations in general at the same time they are looking at Schmit Towing. Their only
other competition in Fridley is Northeast Towing. A multi-tenant complex is really limiting. His
facility was a multi-tenant and that no longer would fit. He is certain they had no issues but they
were a little specialized. A towing operation, such as Northeast Towing, they have residential
behind them that was built up afterwards.
Mr. Hickok stated as he has said, they are a preexisting, non-conforming operation. They are
not asking to be M-1, they would not be living under the M-1 provisions we are outlining here.
A towing service that needs to live by all these stipulations might want to say, hold on a second,
you have this operation over on Old Central and they are not living by any of these stipulations?
Mayor Lund replied, Citywide was actually next door to the salvage yards on 73 '/z they moved
into Fridley because nobody wanted a towing company in their community. They have since
moved.
Mr. Hickok stated that was precisely the problem. There was no district that actually said
"towing service." Staff used some discretion there to say, look, its neighbors are salvage yards
and it has a yard in this particular case where in the event they needed to impound a vehicle.
When the City is asked very specifically about a towing business, where it goes, and whether or
not a site is adequate for a very large fleet and for a towing business that, he would say is a quite
large scale towing operation, then he thinks they need to take it to Council. Staff is telling
Council it is beyond staff's discretion and hope Council agrees with them and tells them whether
they are right or not. Staff thinks the M-1 probably is right and the stipulations probably fit but if
they are wrong, tell staff where a towing operation goes in the City. He does not think it is right
from a legal question perspective for the City to say it does not fit anywhere. We need to define
what district it does need to go in and then, once we decide what district it needs to go in, then
say by what standards.
Mayor Lund stated and he understands that. He is trying to clarify they are okay to stay where
they are, but when they sell or vacate, it is not coming back.
Mr. Hickok stated they can even sell a non-conforming use, they cannot expand.
Mayor Lund stated back to Citywide's case, this was under the types of guidelines staff is
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 18
recommending to Council. As an example when they were here, they also would no longer be
permissible, they would have to get a special use permit under an M-1 where before they did not
need one. It was permissible in the M-1. There were salvage yards up the street and one of the
things they needed was towing. In Citywide's case, they were a little specialized and were not
storing vehicles. In this case, even in an M-1, it is a good fit for a towing company. He thinks it
might be a little restrictive in multi-tenant. He would be more concerned about the type of
operation, and if they have adequate space for vehicles to be parked there. You have to take into
consideration how many employees you have. It might be too restrictive in that it has to be a
stand-alone building. He asked what the zoning was for the buildings behind Bob's Produce.
Mr. Hickok replied there is some M-1, M-2, and there is the Onaway further out.
Mayor Lund stated what about the area closer to University Avenue.
Mr. Hickok said a lot of that is M-1.
Mayor Lund said and that is all multi-tenant. He cannot see where towing would fit in there
because it is relatively small.
Mr. Hickok stated it is going to be a rare multi-tenant building that is going to actually work for
a towing operation because you have a reliance on a landlord and even a little on the City. There
is a certain parking ratio expected for that building; and it was not expected that cars that are not
being attended to, that might be fenced in, are going to take up some of that parking. It is an
after-the-fact situation where you are towing vehicles, parking them in parking stalls that were
intended to be shared by tenants. He honestly thinks you would be asking for problems putting a
towing business in a multi-tenant operation.
Mayor Lund stated a lot of them are not going to want it. That is a pretty visible site in that
particular case. Even the landlord might not want to do that as it may deteriorate from the image
of, for example, Mattress Giant.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated the other issue is because multi-tenants change, the businesses
change pretty frequently and it would be much harder for City staff to maintain the parking
spaces and relationships and actually watch over that.
Mayor Lund stated he just wanted to make sure they are clear about what is too restrictive. In
the case of Citywide you have "X" amount of square footage of the building, you get a
proportionate share of parking outside. They could only use so much space. It was
proportionate to the space they rented. If they rented 25 percent of the building, you have 25
percent of the parking. That seems to be a fair way. He mentioned traffic counts and asked if it
was a little restrictive to say it could only be on a lesser-traveled street. He thought towing
companies might be located on a business street.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated she thought you might not want to be bringing in big vehicles
when you have a very well traveled road.
Councilmember Varichak asked about paragraph (d), the business trailers that are currently in
the front. She asked why they were in the front of the building and not the back.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 19
Sue Schmit, 92 — 43rd Avenue NE, said it was no longer there. The reason it was out there was
because they had lettered the whole outside with the Schmit Towing, and it is kind of a fancy
trailer having all kinds of information about their business. They parked it out front almost as an
advertisement. When they were told it should in the back, they moved it to the back.
Councilmember Varichak asked if there was enough room in the back for all the business
vehicles and cars.
Ms. Schmit said there was plenty of room.
Councilmember Varichak asked about paragraph (f). She knows they have had issues with
screening, fencing, landscaping, etc. She asked if the existing landscaping met the City's
criteria.
Mr. Hickok replied, yes.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Ms. Schmit if they are a 24/7 facility.
Ms. Schmit said their pick-up hours are from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. The only traffic that goes in and
out of there after that would be their guys coming back in with the trucks and getting in their
vehicles and going home.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they are towing vehicles all day and night.
Ms. Schmit replied, they are towing vehicles 24 hours, but they do not tow them to the site.
They are bringing them to repair shops. Very few cars actually get towed into their facility.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the vehicles mentioned that are there for 48 hours.
Ms. Schmit replied, occasionally they will have a private property impound where they will go
to a customer's lot, a dealership, or an apartment complex, and if they have an abandoned
vehicle, they will bring that back to their facility. If the vehicle is improperly parked or if they
are plowing a lot and somebody did not move their vehicle they will tow it to their lot. Ninety
percent of the cars are picked up within 24 to 48 hours. If it is a totally abandoned vehicle, they
have laws they have to follow for sending letters to the registered owner(s) and lienholder(s) and
they have to legally hold them, if they are not a junk holder, for 45 days. At the end of that
period they would dispose of it.
Mayor Lund asked if Anderson Trucking Service on Old Central is closed.
Mr. Hickok stated that is another industry they are working with.
Mayor Lund asked what the zoning was.
Mr. Hickok replied, M-1. It is a trucking company only by virtue. It was there before the M-3
was created in 1993. It would not be able to be there today. It has really discontinued as a
trucking operation in that location and most recently was a construction operation. There would
be a challenge to continue use of that site as a trucking operation now.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 20
Mayor Lund stated it is not a multi-tenant building. It is going to be less than 250 feet from
residential as it is right across the street. This would not be an acceptable towing facility site
either because, first of all, it is within 250 feet of residential. Seems to him it would be
reasonable to go from trucking and then to towing. He asked if Old Central exceeds the 900 trips
per day.
Mr. Hickok replied, yes. By a long shot.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated even it is within the 250 feet, they can still go there, but it is
between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. at night.
Mayor Lund stated, yes, but if you have a big trucking operation and you have a big rollover on
the interstate at 2 a.m. or a car crash some place, they have to say, we cannot tow it into our
facility because we cannot operate then.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Ms. Schmit if they have a badly crashed car do they tow it into
their facility or do they tow it someplace else usually?
Ms. Schmit replied, 90 percent of the time it will go to a repair shop. Unless you have repair at
your facility.
Mayor Lund stated, for example, if people are seriously hurt and the vehicle is towed through
the State Patrol or city police, where are those vehicles towed?
Ms. Schmit replied, in that case a city vehicle or State Patrol vehicle would be brought to their
site. Unless the car owner or the police tell them to tow it to their facility, they could not do that.
Mayor Lund asked if the car owner is incapacitated or unreachable, where would they tow the
vehicle.
Ms. Schmit replied, then the police would have them bring it to their facility.
Mayor Lund asked where does the 900 trips come from.
Mr. Hickok stated 900 is what their average daily trips are. One of the things he should point
out is, as staff evaluated this, they see this as a land-intensive use and not necessarily a neighbor-
friendly use. In light of that, the decision had to be made as to how acceptable do you want to
make this as a use. In certain circumstances it probably works, but in every circumstance would
you want it? Would you want it on the Anderson Trucking site? It is not the most attractive land
use you could put out there. Not a very good re-use of the Anderson Trucking site. Definitely
not a good re-use of a multi-tenant industrial site. There are certain M-1 areas where it would
work This would be one of those but, for all the reasons pointed out, he does not know if you
want a large vehicle business. At Shorty's he did see at times that they were towing in a semi
and they had their very large 16-axle or whatever it was, towing in a very large vehicle and the
traffic on Osborne was affected by it. He does not know if you want your traffic flow affected.
Staff picked something where trip numbers were small.
Councilmember Saefke asked how much of an effect do our ordinances have on county roads
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 21
because we do not have the authority to put up stop signs or any other signage on county roads.
That is a county road and they have their own restrictions and applications.
Mr. Hickok said the City, through the enabling legislation from the State, has been given the
ability to control the land around those roadways. When it comes to platting, the County plays a
role because of the access onto those roadways. Signage is an issue that the County controls, and
the City would work with the County on that. As far as the land use goes, it was deemed
necessary to have the local jurisdiction control the land use. The City always sends rezoning
applications, just as a courtesy, to the County; but they do not have a legislative ability to say,
no, you cannot have that use there.
Councilmember Saefke replied he understands that on the actual land, but he was talking about
the roadway.
Attorney Knaak replied, that depends. Mr. Hickok succinctly laid out what the parameters are
that you can do. In terms of the City controlling the actual road use itself on a County road is
next to nothing as a practical matter. However, if you are controlling a use, depending on the
kinds of controls you put into your zoning ordinance, you have the right to regulate the intensity
of a use at a specific site. For example, while you might not be able to regulate the use of the
road once the trucks get on it, but you could regulate, say in a warehouse situation, the number of
access points or places where the trucks go in and out. You can regulate the length of the lines
for the trucks and the use, etc. You can do what you want to regulate the traffic indirectly by
regulating the use on the property itsel£ That is the best way to do it and the way that it is
normally done. You do not directly regulate or say you can use the county road this way or that
way.
Councilmember Saefke asked if it would be better if they just eliminated the 1,500 traffic count
because as they look at the use of the land itself, for every individual special use permit they can
take that factor into account for the use of that property. Is that correct?
Attorney Knaak replied using a traffic count is a way of ineasuring the intensity of a use. By
quantifying that you are actually well within your rights as a City to regulate the use in a
commercial area if it chose to do that. That is a fairly common way of doing it in a commercial
zone.
Councilmember Saefke said but what they are doing is using a traffic count that perhaps has
nothing to do with the use of that particular property. Just because somebody is driving down
Central Avenue does not mean they are going to pull into any M-1 or M-2. Same with
Mississippi Street, Osborne Road, Highway 65, or University Avenue. It does not mean they are
going to stop in Fridley, and there is the traffic count on the roadway that the City does not have
the authority to regulate.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated, yes, they do. As an example, it is similar to 57th Avenue. We
do look. When we were looking at townhome/condo developments, we were looking at
increases with the trip generation there. We do have enough ability to say, yes, this will cause it
to be an "F" instead of an "E."
Councilmember Saefke asked if 57th was a county road from Main Street to Seventh Street.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 22
James Kosluchar, Public Works Director, replied to University Avenue.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that is the area she is talking about. When they have had
different developments looking at going in there, for example, the Holiday Station, they looked
at how much more trip generation there would be and whether it would cause it to now become
and "F" instead of "E." She asked Councilmember Saefke what number of trips he thought it
should be.
Councilmember Saefke replied, he suggests that it should be eliminated.
Councilmember Bolkcom said she does not think it should be totally eliminated.
Councilmember Saefke asked why not. They take those things into consideration before
issuing a special use permit. Limiting it to a number certain, then you are not taking into account
the roadway, first of all. To him those county roads differ from our own streets.
Mayor Lund asked whether United Defense Properties, now BAE Systems, was still owned by a
private enterprise and BAE Systems rents part of that out.
Mr. Hickok replied, correct. It is zoned M-2, not M-1.
Mayor Lund asked if towing is only acceptable in an M-1 or would it be permissible in M-2 and
M-3 as well.
Mr. Hickok replied the M-2language that carries over an M-1 use would only carry it over with
stipulations that would be standard to the district.
Mayor Lund stated saying it would be permissible in an M-2 might be a good spot. There is no
housing around, they are looking for other tenants, it is a huge site, a lot of parking there, it is by
the railroad tracks and is a heavy industrial area.
Mr. Hickok stated the Planning Commission did seem to support this logic but would you want
to use your valuable industrial land in this way? There are certain properties where this might
work where you put it, and that is going to be in an out-of-way place. Do you want your main
industrial thoroughfares taken up by a use that is outdoor intensive, less attractive, and that has a
potential for disrupting traffic and other things? You do not want it on a BAE site, Old Central,
University Avenue, Osborne Road where it could disrupt its neighbors. He is sure towing
businesses would want to come to Fridley, but is that a good industrial land use for us? On this
particular site it seems to work, but he would say we do not want to use up our land with towing
businesses.
Councilmember Saefke asked regarding the 1,500 count, does that mean that anybody who
comes to them requesting a special use permit, do we provide that traffic count or would they
have to.
Mr. Kosluchar replied they would if the City did not have any on record.
Councilmember Saefke asked if the City does routine traffic counts.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 23
Mr. Kosluchar replied yes.
Councilmember Saefke asked how often.
Mr. Kosluchar replied every four years.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated she would really like staff to look at the "intercom" stipulation
and change it to the 250 feet, instead if saying "directly adjacent" so there is no question.
Councilmember Barnette referred to the area behind Baggan's Pub. There used to be a
trucking company behind there. Is that still there? If not, would that be a reasonable site?
Mr. Hickok said the area is M-2, Heavy Industrial, along the river. It could be an eligible site if
it met all the criteria.
Mr. Hickok asked Councilmember Bolkcom for clarification regarding the 250 feet or less.
Would that be from the dwelling unit itself that is zoned residential?
Councilmember Bolkcom replied, correct.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by
Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 9:32
P.M.
13. Consideration of Text Amendment Request, TA #09-04, by the City of Fridley, to
Consider Amendments to the C-2, General Business, and C-3, General Shopping,
Zoning Districts to Clarify Uses Permitted and Screening Requirements in
Commercial Districts.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and
open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS OPENED AT 9:37
P.M.
Mr. Hickok stated this is a lot about housekeeping. This text amendment contains seven
sections that require clarification. In Section 205.14, Principal Uses, the terms lodges is outdated
and was never defined in the Code. Staff recommends that we replace it with the words,
fraternal organizations since that is already defined in the Code and would cover lodges as well.
Mr. Hickok stated, Section 205.14(1)(c), Uses Permitted With a Special Use Permit, lists bars
and taverns. Because state statute would prohibit us from issuing liquor licenses to bars and
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 24
taverns when we are a municipal city, only restaurants, hotels, and clubs can be issued liquor
licenses in Fridley. Staff thinks it is important to take the words bars and taverns out.
Mr. Hickok stated the word or was missing from the second paragraph in the storage language
in the C-2 zoning code section and did not read correctly.
Mr. Hickok stated in 1999 a text amendment changed the sales display requirements for service
stations. There was similar language under the screening section of the commercial code. That
should have also been changed at the time. In addition, the words except where are missing.
Mr. Hickok stated during a recent move of C-3 Business, staff discovered that there are missing
words in the principal use section of the C-3 code. The missing words one of greatly impacts the
intent of the Code.
Mr. Hickok stated also recent parking reductions in Code in commercial parking requirements,
staff found 50 parking spaces was a reasonable minimum number. Also removing the reference
to bars and taverns being allowed with a special use permit also needs to be removed and the
subsequent allowed uses will then need to be renumbered.
Mr. Hickok stated in the C-2 section of the Code, remove the reference to "(c) Merchandise is
located on a service pump island" since in 1999 that text amendment resulted in only allowing
merchandise to be stored within four feet of the front of the building.
Mr. Hickok stated the Planning Commission held a public hearing on all these changes on
December 16, 2009; and they unanimously recommended approval. No one from the public was
there to speak, nor did anyone contact staff or appear to testify in that public hearing.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked what "assembly facilities" were.
Mr. Hickok replied this is important as they talked about Ralupa because our Code, as many
codes do around the Twin Cities, allows assembly facilities.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked what is Ralupa?
Mr. Hickok stated it is the religious laws governing use of property. An assembly facility would
be a church, something like a church, a place of worship.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked why does it say, not including drive-in-theaters?
Mr. Hickok stated at some point in history this ordinance was meant to distinguish between
theaters and outdoor theaters.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether there should be some type of punctuation there.
Mr. Hickok stated he would like that phrase to be placed right after the word "theaters."
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 25
Councilmember Bolkcom asked regarding page 58 of the packet, (2)(a), it says the Council may
allow the applicant to delay the installation of the sidewalk if the applicant signs an agreement
that will be constructed when the "City" requires the installation.
Mr. Hickok stated it should say "Council."
Councilmember Bolkcom said on page 56 of the packet, 4(b), is that saying that all the
materials and equipment can be sitting there while it is being used for construction?
Mr. Hickok replied, you could not have materials there that are being used for construction
elsewhere. This is only for those materials and equipment that are being used for construction on
the premises.
Councilmember Bolkcom referred to page 57 of the packet, section 6(1), "Garden centers or
nurseries which require outside display or storage of inerchandise," is that like the Home Depot
issue? She does not understand that one.
Mr. Hickok replied yes.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked do we actually allow it even with a special use permit. What
about Home Depot where they put their stuff out in the front?
Mr. Hickok replied, yes, they have a special use permit; and they are operating correctly as a
garden center with a special use permit in the district they are on. As a provision of that special
use permit, it says they cannot have anything outside of that on the sidewalks and in the parking
lot.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated but the language makes it sound like she can have it, if she has
uses permitted within a special use permit.
Mr. Hickok replied, this is meant to distinguish a garden center or nursery that would be within
the complex. What this is saying is if it is going to be outside or requires an outdoor display,
storage of inerchandise, it will require a special use permit.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if we allow it.
Mr. Hickok replied yes, with a special use permit.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Home Depot could get a special use permit and put all the
plants they want outside their facility.
Mr. Hickok replied, no. Our standard across that board has been that the special use permit
requires architectural integration into the complex.
Mayor Lund stated it does not say all the stipulations that are going to go with the special use
permit.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 26
Mr. Hickok asked if Councilmember Bolkcom wanted additional language there. When you list
a use as a special use you are linked by what standards the City expects you to abide by to do
that use. Is she asking that they include the Home Depot standards there?
Councilmember Bolkcom replied, either that or just cross out the "require outside display or
storage" and just leave it as garden center or nursery needing a special use permit.
Mr. Hickok replied there are two things she is suggesting here. Both are good. He thinks if
there is a preference though, now would be the time to list those standards/stipulations that we
have applied to a garden center. That would probably be even better than crossing out the words.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked how many stipulations there are for the garden centers.
Mr. Hickok replied there are about 17 stipulations.
Mayor Lund referred to page 57 of the packet at the very top, item "(c) Merchandise is located
on a service pump island" is crossed out. Does this mean that merchandise was allowed, located
on the service pump islands?
Mr. Hickok replied, in 1999 the City changed it to not allow it.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by
Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 9:48
P.M.
OLD BUSINESS:
14. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 11, General Provisions and
Fees, of the Fridley City Code.
Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated as part of the 2010 budget process staff did conduct
a review of the fees and charges. Those resulted in a few recommendations by department
managers. The 2010 budget did reflect those changes. On December 14 the first reading was
presented and tabled pending some clarification on some suggested changes to the ordinance to
assist in showing the suggested changes, underlines and strikeouts have been used to show those
changes.
Mr. Pribyl stated the first two items related to condominiums and it is recommended word
changes only, with fees remaining at the current level with no changes suggested. The fee
changes being recommended generally are rental housing related fees. The rental fees actually
decrease on a percentage basis as one moves from the single-family rental unit to over five units,
spreading some of these fixed costs over a higher number of units. Staff recommends approval
of the second reading of the ordinance change.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 27
Councilmember Bolkcom stated she is trying to recall the conversation related to the
telecommunications permit, because it was $400 on an approved site. She thought she brought
up the question regarding if three companies wanted to go on the same site, it would be $500 per
use to co-locate.
Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, replied "per user" was her suggestion on the
co-location.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the difference in amounts.
Mr. Hickok replied, it would be $400 for a telecommunication user to come in and locate on an
approved site. Any subsequent co-locate would be a$500 fee. On top of the $400 fee on the
original approved site, there are the other engineering review and permit fees to go with the
structure being built.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated they really need to look at these rental fees and look at the fee
study in the event they need to make changes again next year. She is really concerned that our
rental housing is costing us a lot more than what we are getting fees for. We have heard from
Chief Berg that we are going in the hole and this is not going to bring us up to that number.
Mr. Pribyl stated he talked to Chief Berg who stated that it is his intent to actually bring these
up so the budget is matching the expense. However, due to the increase, he wanted to do it in a
couple of steps. It is his intent with the future budgets to actually recover those costs.
William Burns, City Manager, stated he recalls the fees are going up by 29 percent. They are
also going up with conjunction with what other cities are doing with these fees as well.
Mr. Pribyl stated they are trying to it somewhat in line with what other cities are charging.
Councilmember Varichak asked if other cities losing money with those fees.
Dr. Burns replied possibly.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to waive the second reading of the ordinance and adopt
Ordinance No. 1263 on second reading and order publication. Seconded by Councilmember
Varichak.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
NEW BUSINESS:
15. Informal Status Report
Councilmember Saefke mentioned that for those of us who have private garbage haulers
picking up yard waste, it is now illegal to use non-biodegradable plastic bags for it.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 4, 2010 PAGE 28
ADJOURN.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Varichak, to adjourn.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:02 P.M.
Respectfully submitted by,
Denise M. Johnson Scott J. Lund
Recording Secretary Mayor