Loading...
CCM 08/24/2015 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY AUGUST 24, 2015 The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund Councilmember Barnette Councilmember Saefke Councilmember Varichak Councilmember Bolkcom OTHERS PRESENT: Wally Wysopal, City Manager Darcy Erickson, City Attorney Scott Hickok, Community Development Director James Kosluchar, Public Works Director Jack Kirk, Director of Parks and Recreation Julie Jeppson, Stepping Stone Emergency Housing Katie Smet, Zoning and Code Enforcement Intern Warren Stock, Central Roofing Mike Maher, Springbrook Nature Center PRESENTATION: Julie Jeppson, Stepping Stone Emergency Housing Katie Smet - Summer Code Enforcement Report: Katie Smet , Zoning and Code Enforcement Intern, presented an overview of the work she completed during the summer. As a Zoning and Code Enforcement Intern, she was inspecting entire residential properties, looking for non-compliance with the City Code in order to gain compliance with property maintenance of City Codes and public, health and safety codes. Part of that was to reach the objectives of improving safety and habitability of occupied dwellings in neighborhoods, to reduce the neighborhood complaints regarding properties in non-compliance with City Codes and to reduce spending of limited public sector resources. Ms. Smet stated the City of Fridley has a total of 9,311 residential properties, and she inspected primarily R-1, R-2, R-3, and S-1 districts which are single-family, two-family, multi-family dwellings in the Hyde Park District. Ms. Smet stated she began her internship on May 18 and has inspected 6,474 residential properties which make up 70 percent of the total residential properties. She presented a map showing the areas she had inspected and had yet to inspect, and residences that had non- FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 2 compliance with the City Code. She had a total of 1,529 code violations. The majority of those were outside storage--brush, solid waste, inoperable vehicles, vehicle parking off pavement, housing maintenance and parking lot striping. In addition to those, she came across issues with property maintenance, zoning, weeds, yard waste, driveway nuisances, and addresses not visible on properties. The majority of the Code violations she came across were outside storage. There were 714 cases, which made up 47 percent of the City Code violations. Some of the examples were mattresses disposed of outside, bulk items around dumpsters in the larger residential complexes, and just in general, miscellaneous outside storage and yard items. Ms. Smet stated the next were brush violations. There were 218 cases which made up of 14 percent of the total violations. Some examples were weeds, vegetation, and tree branches that were cut down and disposed of in the backyard rather than at the Bunker Hills facility. The next group of violations was vehicle violations. There were 105 inoperable vehicle violations. The majority of these were expired tabs on the license plates but also included visible signs of inoperability on vehicles, such as flat tires and missing pieces, and missing license plates on vehicles as well. In addition, there were 90 cases of vehicle parking off pavement. Total vehicle violations represented 13 percent of the violations. Ms. Smet stated the other one was solid waste violations. She had a total of 165 cases and 143 were improper placement of solid waste containers in the front yard setback. She had 3 cases of overflowing dumpsters and solid waste bins, and 19 cases of improper enclosure of dumpsters in the larger residential complexes. That made up 11 percent of the total violations. Ms. Smet stated with respect to housing maintenance, there were 75 cases which made up 5 percent of the total violations. Examples were paint chipping and cracking on properties, siding falling down and being covered with plywood, and paint chipping and cracking on fences, sheds, and garages. Ms. Smet stated the last one was parking lot stripes. She had 42 cases which made up 3 percent of the Code violations. City Code requires a property with over four parking stalls to be striped. This was a City Code that was strongly enforced in the industrial and commercial properties before. This year she focused more on the residential properties. Therefore, it was the largest non-compliance City Code in the apartments. Ms. Smet stated overall she sent a total of 1,529 first notices, and 83 percent were resolved after their second inspection. She sent a total of 16 abatements, although she only conducted 2 abatements, and had one yard mowed. She did not send out any citations or tow any vehicles. Throughout the process, she was communicating with tenants and property owners face to face, through e-mail, and over the telephone, working with them to resolve the cases. Therefore, she did not have to follow through with any abatements and did not send any citations. Ms. Smet stated she currently has 162 cases open. She thanked the City and the Community Development team, along with all the property owners and tenants she worked with. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 3 Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated Ms. Smet has been a champion on the City's staff. She has really done a great job. This is not an easy job. You are dealing with people and where they live, and they are proud of their properties. Oftentimes they do not know they are violating any code, so you are dealing with delicate issues. Katie has done a wonderful job. You know when you are walking by Ms. Smet's office there is just a good dialogue going on with the homeowner, and she is very good at dealing with the customer. She is extremely good at understanding and being open-minded about solutions and results. Staff has asked Mr. Wysopal about extending her stay to finish the code enforcement. As they look forward to the 2016 budget, they will ask Council to consider a full-time position for this upcoming season. Mayor Lund stated usually the summer interns are done at the end of summer. If she has 162 cases open, she has a ways to go or a lot of work to do in the interim. It sounds like she has a very high success rate. It is very successful when she gets that kind of compliance, and she has not had to issue any citations. Although some might think staff is just looking to add to the City coffers through fines, etc., it is all about getting properties into compliance to help give our community a good positive image. He thanked Ms. Smet for the work she has done. He has not received any complaints. Councilmember Bolkcom said a couple of people have asked when Ms. Smet goes around and sees someone in their yard does she talk with them? What is the process? One person was offended because they were home, and Ms. Smet did not just ask them. She asked if Ms. Smet could explain the process. Ms. Smet replied, yes, she has been asked that question before. If she sees someone outside and she sees a Code violation, she will talk with them. Otherwise, it is difficult to go to every single property, ring the doorbell, and talk to them. Therefore, they just stick to the process of sending a first notice and letting them know. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if she put it in the door the first time. Ms. Smet stated they mail it. Mr. Hickok stated part of this is that consistent process. They want everyone to have the same r opportunity. It also helps for staff to document they have sent the notice. This is really meant to be an educational process. As Ms. Smet's statistics show, 83 percent of the cases are resolved with the first letter. They do like the letters to go out, but will not shy away from talking with someone in their yard. The City wants it to be a friendly process. They purposely do not drive a car that is intimidating or anything else. Sometimes knocking on doors, too, can get a little bit tense; and you are dealing with delicate issues. Although it seems a bit less personal, by putting it in writing, they can go back and refer to it. Property owners know what the date is and they can keep it handy. Sometimes staff thinks that is a better solution for them as well. Councilmember Bolkcom stated, just for confirmation, Ms. Smet went out and did the same thing from one street to the next. It did not matter which neighborhood it was. Ms. Smet replied, yes, that is correct. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 4 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of August 10, 2015. APPROVED. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Approve Change Order No. 3 (Final) for 2014 Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST2014-01. Wally Wysopal, City Manager, stated the amount is $19,904. This represents 3 percent of the total contract. This is because of additional pavement reclamation directed by the City. APPROVED. 2. Appointment - City Employee. Mr. Wysopal stated the City will have a new police officer effective the week of August 31, and his name is Jason Elasky. APPROVED. 3. Claims (ACH PCard 1508; 169446 - 169628). APPROVED. 4. Licenses APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. 5. Estimates Astech Corporation, Inc. P.O. Box 1025 St. Cloud, MN 56302 2014 Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST2014-01 Estimate No. 8 (FINAL)..................................................$15,608.64 APPROVED. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 5 ADOPTION OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: Councilmember Barnette stated there is a typo listed in the agenda. The salary stated for the new employee should per hour and not per year. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the proposed consent agenda with the correction. 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 adopt the agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM: No one from the audience spoke. NEW BUSINESS: 6. Variance Request, VAR #15-02, by Central Roofing Company, to Reduce the Side Yard Setback from 20 Feet to 6.7 Feet, to Allow the Construction of a Building Addition, Generally Located at 4550 Main Street N.E. and Resolution Approving Variance, VAR #15-02 to Reduce the Side Yard Setback from 20 Feet to 6.7 Feet to Allow Building Addition, for the Property Located at 4550 Main Street NE, Owned by Rum River III, LLC, Petitioner, by Central Roofing Company (Ward 3). Scott Hickok , Community Development Director,stated the petitioner, Warren Stock, is seeking a variance to reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 6.7 feet to allow for the construction of a building addition on the southwest side of the existing building at his property at 4550 Main Street. Mr. Hickok stated the following is Mr. Stock’s statement as to what the issue is on the property: "The addition will fill empty space between the main building and the storage building. It is preferred that the new addition marry with the storage building which sits 6.7 feet off the property line. The west wall of the new addition will serve as a security barrier preventing trespassers from entering the property. The materials and the vehicles housed within the yard FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 6 require a high level of security. The length of the building in this location is also critical to the interior operations of the business due to the size of the materials being fabricated within." Mr. Hickok stated the City's response to that statement would be that City Code does allow accessory structures to be 5 feet from the property line; however, an addition to the principal structure is required to be 20 feet. This variance request is to allow an addition to the main building that will align with the existing accessory structure on the south side of the property which is 6.7 feet from the property line. Mr. Hickok presented an illustration of the existing building, the existing accessory building, and the proposed addition. This also cleans the view into an open storage area in the rear. This property does pre-date the City's special use permit requirements for outdoor storage. It does create a nice visual screen and separation, and it does allow a nice finished front facing Main Street and a little additional parking. Mr. Hickok stated the standards have had a good look by the State and the Legislature which came to a decision that it has to do with practical difficulty instead of hardship which is the term they are most familiar with. Is this variance in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance? After staff analysis, the answer is yes. Placement of the addition is already in an area used for storage, so green space will not be removed for the construction of the addition. Access to this site is already restricted to the north side, and the existing building already has a fire suppression system. The addition will require one which helps alleviate some of the concerns about separation of buildings on the site. This will meet all building code requirements. Mr. Hickok stated the next question staff asks in testing whether this variance could be adopted is whether the variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides this property as redevelopment, and promoting business expansion is helpful in that redevelopment effort. Mr. Hickok stated as to whether this proposal puts the property to a use in a reasonable manner, the request is not out of character with the neighborhood and the adjoining properties. The new structure will be a consistent structure and provide a consistent look on the property. The length of the building addition is essential to the interior operations of the business because of the size of the materials manufactured within. Mr. Hickok stated as to whether there are unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner. going back to the uniqueness and hardship question asked before, the answer is, yes. The buildings on this site and the business existed before the petitioner took ownership of the property and the business, so internal workings of the property and the building positioning had already been established when the petitioner bought the property. Mr. Hickok stated the connection of these buildings will include security to this site. The materials and the equipment stored in the yard on this site require a secure location. This did get a thorough review and analysis by the Appeals Commission at their August 5 meeting. A public FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 7 hearing was held. The Commission unanimously recommended approval with the following stipulations: 1.The petitioner shall obtain any required permit prior to the start of construction. 2.Landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permit. 3.City engineering staff to review and approve grading, drainage, and utility plan prior to issuance of a building permit. The building addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing 4. building. Councilmember Saefke asked whether anybody made any comments at the public hearing. Mr. Hickok replied, no. Staff had one property adjacent just ask a question, because of the mailings, as to what this is exactly. Beyond that there were no comments. Councilmember Saefke stated it makes sense to do what Mr. Stock wants to do with the business and the manufacturing of steel roofing. You need big machines and the big room. He asked Mr. Stock how long they are. Warren Stock , Central Roofing Company, replied what they do is manufacture the wall panels, roofing, and fabricate the metal edges and all that sort of thing. Now they are going to fabricate the wall panels. These panels can be anywhere from 2 feet x 2 feet to as big as 32 feet x 6 feet wide. That is kind of how the building is designed. Basically they can set up a piece of wall area. It comes clad in different colors of aluminum or steel and are insulated, all pressed together. They have custom routers, so basically they can cut out any design out of these metal panels. They probably see the panels on the new Chevrolet dealers. The gray ones. It really has become more of a business because of the issues with stucco in the past. These are much more economical, they are insulated, and have different degrees of water tightness. From their perspective the manufacturing will add 10 jobs but for every job they have on the inside, it creates 5 more jobs on the outside. Councilmember Saefke stated it is a good thing, economically for the City and the business, to have this. It looks like there is a building on the 4500 lot? He asked what that was. Mr. Hickok replied, at one time that property actually was owned by the same owner that owned Mr. Stock's property. It predates Mr. Stock's ownership of it. At one time it was called Rubber Research. Councilmember Bolkcom asked the petitioner whether he was aware of the four stipulations and if he approved them. Mr. Stock replied, yes. He thinks they already turned in the landscaping by the architect. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 8 MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve Variance Request, VAR #15-02, by Central Roofing Company, with the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall obtain any required permit prior to the start of construction. 2. Landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permit. 3. City engineering staff to review and approve grading, drainage, and utility plan prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. The building addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing building. and adopt Resolution No. 2015-38. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. Resolution Approving the Plans and Ordering Advertisement for Bid: Springbrook Nature Center Improvement Project (Ward 3). Jack Kirk, Director of Parks and Recreation, stated he was at the meeting to talk about the Springbrook Nature Center building project and to seek Council's approval of the redesigned plans and the authorization to move ahead in early September and get some bids on that project. Mr. Kirk stated they are all aware what happened with the project in the spring. They were disappointed the bids came in too high, but they worked really hard to make some adjustments to bring the design into budget. Some of the more significant changes they are looking at are actually reducing the size of the footprint, the square footage of the building. In the original design last spring, they had two separate classrooms, and now they are looking at taking those two classrooms off but incorporating the two classrooms into the large, multi-purpose gathering space. The exhibit area had a large corridor going through it. The vestibule and exhibit area of 16 feet was reduced down to 12 feet with the new set of plans. The overall vestibule is a pretty good sized one, and that has been reduced. There was also an architectural and maybe a little too complex roof they presented to them, something they called a butterfly roof. That has been modified and simplified and they believe that is going to have an impact on the costs as well. Mr. Kirk stated this new design is still going to have some very nice features. Some of the key features to this building are going to be a large gathering space which can be used for community events, special events such as reunions, seminars, and possibly wedding receptions. That space can be divided into four separate classroom areas. As they know, they do a lot of work with the school districts in the area with environmental education. They have a lot of groups that come out to the Nature Center, so having these classroom spaces is going to be extremely important. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 9 Mr. Kirk stated they are going to have expanded and new exhibits. They will have larger and accessible restroom facilities, a catering kitchen to handle some of the events they talked about, office space, and also storage space. The new and remodeled part he believes is going to be a wonderful facility for the visitors who come to Springbrook in the future. Mr. Kirk stated there is also a Phase II which is going to be a number of the outside elements, and the design and fundraising for that is being worked on by the Springbrook Foundation. Mr. Kirk stated the overall budget is $5,460,000. They were extremely fortunate to be included in the State bonding bill in 2014 to the tune of $5,000,000. There is no match by the City of Fridley required in that bonding bill. However, the remaining $460,000 is something that the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation is going to be providing through fundraising efforts they are undertaking. Mr. Kirk stated the plans and specifications for this project are being prepared by Partners & Sirny Architects. Upon approval of those plans and the authorization to move ahead with the bidding, they would be available the week of Labor Day. There would be a prebid meeting at Springbrook Nature Center for the potential contractors on Monday, September 14, at 10 a.m. The bid opening would be in the Council Chambers on Wednesday, September 23, at 2 p.m. Their plan is to bring back the results of that bidding to the City Council for action on Monday, September 28. Assuming everything goes as planned, construction on the building would begin in early October. It would involve relocating staff and some of the programming. If all goes well, they would be back in the building prior to next summer during the heavy program season. It is an aggressive schedule, but the construction manager and staff believe it is doable. Mr. Kirk stated he recommends the City Council adopt the resolution. The resolution would approve the redesigned plans and authorize staff to advertise for bids for the Springbrook Nature Center Improvement Project. Councilmember Bolkcom said it is still going to be a great building. The plan would be that Pumpkin Night in the Park would still take place. It might be a little different, and also the trails would stay open. It is not like the whole facility would be closing down because of the construction of the new portion. Mr. Kirk stated the building itself would not be available. The Pumpkin Night in the Park, their Halloween themed event, is a big event each year; and they are still planning on having that at Springbrook. There will be some changes. The trails will remain open for public use. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mike Maher if he would just summarize how the changes affect what they were going to previously do. Mike Maher, Director of Springbrook Nature Center, stated there were some changes to the design; but the extra time that they had in the redesigned process really allowed the opportunity to come up with a plan that was going to maximize the space in the most efficient way. They did shorten up the vestibule space but created a building entrance that opened up in more of a wide configuration which would allow them to have really exciting dynamic exhibits available right FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 10 away when the visitors walk through the door. Looking at the classroom space, they designed that very deliberately for educational purposes. In the original plan it was sort of more of a gathering space. Now it features cabinetry, sinks, and appropriate floor coverings, so it really allows them to do different activities. Councilmember Bolkcom stated staff will have a better opportunity to watch more parts because as they well know there is limited staff there. Mr. Maher stated it is not uncommon for them to have one or two staff members in the building at any given time. Another goal they accomplished was increased visibility and sight lines throughout the building to best serve the park visitors. Councilmember Bolkcom stated also should the bids come in lower, there is still some opportunity to do the green roof, etc. Mr. Kirk replied the sloped roof over the gathering space will be in the bids as an alternate depending on what p rices come in. There are a couple of bid alternates that would allow them to do certain things. Councilmember Bolkcom said there are some trades out there now who are hungry for the work, making this a good competitive time to put out bidding. Mr. Kirk replied that is what they are hearing. In the spring, there were many contractors who were extremely busy and did not even put in a bid as they had no time. The construction manager stated the contractors are looking for work starting in the fall. Councilmember Barnette stated one of the question he hears all the time, going back to the original referendum the City had on Springbrook, was that there be no additional tax dollars included. In this resolution, it mentions the statement about the $5,000,000 grant from the State of Minnesota with additional funds being provided by the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation through local fundraising initiatives. Mr. Kirk stated the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation continues to work hard on their fundraising efforts. Anyone who wants to be a part of it they certainly still can. There are opportunities for naming rights for different features of the project, and there is going to be paver stones for people to recognize loved ones, etc. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2015-39. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 11 8. Informal Status Reports. James Kosluchar, Public Works Director,stated he wanted to update Council on some discussions they have had about the traffic and speeds on Third Street in the vicinity of Horizon Drive. As they discussed last week they did have a meeting on site with the residents along Third Street. The majority of them basically supported the bumpouts as a method for some speed control. There were comments about the intersection at Horizon, particularly in regard to non- compliant vehicles as far as stopping and he knows the Fridley Police Department has been out there doing some added enforcement; however, staff is looking at some potential options of a typical nature. Mr. Kosluchar showed some sketches of a couple of options staff thought would work well. The first is a raised intersection which is approximately 26 feet across at the top. It raises the intersection about a foot. Basically the vehicles have to slow down to kind of climb and get over this. It is not an impediment to walking or really an impediment to vehicles, but it is something they would feel going over. They could add cautionary arrow striping that basically reinforces that it is raised. That is Option A. Councilmember Bolkcom asked whether the one-foot elevation would be an issue in the winter. Mr. Kosluchar replied, no it would not be. They would make sure the pavement would have good friction surface on it. It is basically like going down kind of a shallow slope. Councilmember Varichak asked as far as snow falling or anything like that, does he feel there is any hindrance there. Mr. Kosluchar replied, he has talked it over with the City’s operations people, and they do not believe there is any issue at all. Mr. Kosluchar stated the other option would be what is called a diagonal diverter. What this would do is close the street to thru traffic. Third Street would be diverted to Horizon if you were to travel south on Third Street. If you were to travel north, this would be a dead end. The configuration of the dead end still needs some work. Basically they just wanted to show the turning movement could service the parking lot for the apartment that is on the east side of this intersection. What they would probably do is bulb out one side or both sides and make this a small cul de sac where vehicles could turn around. They would sign it appropriately from the south end that this street would be a street with no outlet. Mr. Kosluchar stated staff would like to get additional feedback from the residents on Third Street. Staff will be doing another mailer and have tentatively set up an on-site meeting for 6 p.m. on Tuesday, September 1. That announcement will be going with the survey request. Mr. Wysopal stated this is a project where the City has already ordered the project with the approved designed, and these are two alternatives the City is looking at to respond to residents' concerns about traffic safety. Staff is going to have that meeting and present those two options to them and then come back to Council with some recommendations. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 24, 2015 PAGE 12 Mr. Kosluchar said staff would like to be sensitive to the residents who attended and give them an opportunity for feedback. They also think it is a good opportunity for those who could not attend or maybe work second shift. The City will also have an electronic survey as well as a paper survey. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Council could get a police report attached to that as to what they have done so far, what they have seen, and what some of their recommendations are. Mr. Kosluchar replied what they would do is compile that information and provide it to Council in a report at the upcoming Council meeting on September 14. Mr. Wysopal stated the City has received some calls regarding concerns about coyotes in a couple neighborhoods. On the City's website there is a lot more information for residents to take a look at. This information is taken off the DNR's website. Some suggestions are to secure all garbage containers, continue to confine any small dogs and cats in kennels, vaccinate all pets, and consider installing coyote proof fencing. There are pictures of the fencing on the DNR website. Also the best protection is harassing and chasing and shouting at them. Do not feed them and do not allow your small dogs and cats outside unattended. The coyotes have been sighted in a couple of the larger park areas. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:16 P.M . Respectfully submitted by, Denise M. Johnson Scott J. Lund Recording Secretary Mayor