Loading...
CCM 07/23/2001 THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF JULY 23,2001 The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Lund led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund, Councilmember Barnette, Councilmember Bolkcom, Councilmember Billings, Councilmember Wolfe. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Senator Don Betzold discussed some of the bills that were presented during the legislative session. He indicated that tax increment financing will be harder to obtain. He thought Fridley may be exempt from some of the problems with the tax levy issues that may have resulted from the new Charter language. Representative Connie Bernardy discussed property tax relief and education reform. She stated that the Springbrook Nature Center would probably receive some funding in the fall. Mayor Lund asked if there is a new form of redevelopment tool. Senator Betzold stated that right now,he did not know. Representative Bernardy stated that hopefully,tax relief would extend to renters in the future. Mr. Burns stated that he felt the City's legislative delegation was very responsive and he thanked them for working with Fridley. Representative Barbara Goodwin stated that it would take a long time to see the effects of the changes in the tax system. She appreciates the work that Council did with them during the session. They are happy that people are getting rebates and reduced property taxes but not happy that education is not getting the same attention. Senator Satveer Chaundhary discussed commuter rail funding. He said they obtained some technology grant dollars for the Columbia Heights School District that also serves some Fridley residents. He said they were also able to pass some legislation pertaining to child pornography which will make it easier for police to get search warrants for suspects. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 2 Mayor Lund thanked Senator Chaudhary for his efforts. He asked if there had been any ._. discussion on a possible new tool for redevelopment since the main one had been virtually eliminated. Senator Chaudhary stated that he was open to suggestions. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: Councilmember Wolfe stated that he would like Item Nos. 6 and 7 removed for discussion. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she would like Item No. 9 removed for clarification. Councilmember Barnette stated that he would like to remove Item No. 8 for discussion. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to approve the proposed consent agenda with Item Nos. 6, 7, 8, and 9 placed after Item No. 15. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of July 9, 2001. APPROVED. OLD BUSINESS: 1. ORDINANCE NO. 1153 AMENDING SECTION 6.06, CONTRACTS, HOW LET, AND CHAPTER 8, PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER: Mr. Bums, City Manager, stated that this ordinance changes the requirements for public bidding in a manner that agrees with State law. It also changes the majority needed for approval of an assessment project. The proposed majority is four out of five Council members. ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1153. 2. ORDINANCE NO. 1154 AMENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PROPERTY LICENSE FEES: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this ordinance raises rental licensing fees by ten percent (10%). The new fees are effective for licenses that expire on August 31 of this — year. These fees have not been raised since 1994. Staff recommended Council's approval. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 3 ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1154. — 3. ORDINANCE NO. 1155 AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO ACCESSIBLE PARKING (ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA#01-02,BY THE CITY OF FRIDLEY): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this pertains to parking for the handicapped. This ordinance adopts Chapter 1341 of the Minnesota Rules by reference. Current law requires one stall for every 50 spaces. The new change will require one stall for every 25 spaces. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1155. NEW BUSINESS: 4. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR AUGUST 13, 2001, TO CONSIDER OFFICIALLY DEEMING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5800 TENNISON DRIVE N.E. AS HAZARDOUS (WARD 2): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that as a result of two warrants and two property inspections, the subject property has been declared unfit for human habitation. The property owner has been given until today to make repairs to the property, submit a plan for bringing the property into compliance with local ordinances, or request a hearing with a third party hearing examiner. Late last week, the property owner informed the City that she wanted a hearing before a third party hearing examiner. In the event that the hearing is held prior to August 13, we will bring the findings to the Council at that time. If no opinion has been rendered by the third party examiner prior to August 13, we will ask that the hearing be continued. ESTABLISHED A PUBLIC HEARING FOR AUGUST 13, 2001. 5. REQUEST FOR A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION TO VAR #00-15, BY VISION WOODWORKING, TO ALLOW A BUILDING ADDITION, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 7890 HICKORY STREET N.E. (WARD 3): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the request is for a front yard setback variance for Vision Woodworking,the owners of the property along 79th Avenue. This will give them time to complete a building addition. Staff recommended Council's approval. APPROVED A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION TO VARIANCE,VAR#00-15. 6. RESOLUTION ORDERING PRELIMINARY PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES OF THE COSTS THEREOF: UTILITY PROJECT NO. 342: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this resolution applies to the construction of water and sewer improvements to the Varichak addition on Benjamin Drive. These FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 4 improvements were required by the City's development agreement with the developer, and they were not installed as required. The City Attorney has reviewed the options available to the City and recommended that the City install the required utility improvements and assess the costs to the property owners. Staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. 7. RESOLUTION RECEIVING THE PRELIMINARY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MATTER OF CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS: UTILITY PROJECT NO. 342: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this resolution pertains to specified improvements to the Varichak addition. Quotes were solicited in April, 2001. The total cost is $33,040. Staff has concluded that the cost is reasonable and the project is feasible. Staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. 8. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN OF A REPLACEMENT PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, GENERALLY — LOCATED AT 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.(WARD 1): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the City has solicited quotes from seven different engineering firms for design work associated with replacement of the pedestrian bridge at the Municipal Center. It was determined that the quote from Krech, O'Brien, Mueller & Wass, Inc., of Inver Grove Heights was the lowest and best quote. The proposal includes the evaluation of replacing the structure that was recently demolished when a sanitation truck failed to clear it. The cost is $7,252. Staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. 9. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.2001 - 1: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that most of this cost is for the replacement of 106 water system curb boxes that are more than 50 years old. The total cost is $14,330. Staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED TO THE REGULAR AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 5 10. CLAIMS: APPROVED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 100470 - 100737. 11. LICENSES: APPROVED ALL LICENSES AS SUBMITTED. 12. ESTIMATES: Approved estimates as follows: Pearson Brothers, Inc. 240 St. Johns Street Loretto, MN 55357 Street Improvement(Sealcoat) Project No. ST. 2001 - 10 FINAL ESTIMATE $ 15,163.14 Dave Perkins Contracting, Inc. 14230 Basalt Street N.W. Ramsey, MN 55303 2001 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2001 - 1 Estimate No. 2 $ 62,500.00 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the agenda as amended with Item Nos. 6, 7, 8, and 9 placed after Item No. 15. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM,VISITORS: Mr. Richard Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace, asked when they were going to discuss the Planning Commission meeting minutes of July 18. Councilmember Billings stated that the minutes will not get to them for a couple of weeks. Mr. Burns stated that they would probably be on the agenda for the August 13 meeting. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 6 Councilmember Billings asked if Mr. Harris was talking about the acceptance of the minutes or a particular item on the agenda. Mr. Harris stated that he would like to discuss a particular item and the statements that were made about it. Councilmember Billings stated that they get the minutes but do not always discuss them. Mr. Harris stated that it has to do with the sprinkler ordinance. Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that it is scheduled for discussion at the August 13 meeting. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 13. CONSIDERATION OF A REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #01-02, BY BOBBY TAYLOR, TO CHANGE A DWELLING FROM R-1 SINGLE FAMILY, TO R-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 401 IRONTON STREET N.E. (WARD 3) (TABLED JUNE 18,2001): MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to remove this item from the table. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that Mr. Taylor is the property owner and is requesting a rezoning from R-1, single family, to R-3, multiple family residential. This will accommodate the number of units and density desired to operate his sober house. The site was platted in 1966, and in 1976 the previous owner obtained a special use permit which allowed the residence to have a second dwelling unit within. In 1999, the property had been converted outside of the guidelines of the 1976 Council action into three distinct units with two additional sleeping rooms in the basement. In May of 2000, a special use permit was revoked by the City Council rendering this a single-family residential structure. In the fall of 2000, the City received numerous calls from realtors and prospective buyers inquiring of the possibility of using this home as a multi-unit rental. In March of 2001, Mr. Taylor requested that the City conduct an inspection of the property in order to obtain a rental license. Upon inspection, the City inspector noted a number of major remodeling items without permits and that there were three distinct units within and at least 9 to 11 people living there. Mr. Taylor was informed he had an illegal rental and must reduce the number of unrelated persons in the home to 5 to meet the R-1 requirements. Mr. Hickok stated that there has been no building permit issued since December of 1999 which _ was for an egress window. A rezoning is a City discretionary grant and the request must be in keeping with the overall vision and best interest of the City. Historically, a rezoning in Fridley FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 7 has also involved consideration of the health, safety, and welfare issues as alluded to in the property history section of this report. Those issues cause great concern. The City's December 1999 inspection revealed that the structure was not adequate to allow additional units. The City's March 2000 inspection revealed that Mr. Taylor had done many cosmetic changes to the home without the benefits of permits and property inspection. Mr. Hickok stated that the request fails to meet the following criteria for rezoning: The first is that compatibility of the proposed use with the comprehensive plan is inappropriate because it makes no mention of expanding the R-3 zoning district into this neighborhood. Granting of this rezoning request would be inconsistent with the City's overall vision for this neighborhood. Compatibility of the proposed district with adjacent uses is inappropriate because it would allow three units and up to fifteen unrelated persons to live on this property. This density is well beyond what is allowed in a R-1 rezoning and would increase the traffic. There is not adequate paved parking on the site to meet the R-3 code requirements for parking. Creating an appropriately sized parking lot would drastically change the residential feel and the look of this neighborhood. Designation of the R-3 district would allow the property owner to remove the single family home and replace it with a three-unit apartment building with any type of residential character and architecture which may not blend with the neighborhood. Compliance of the proposed use with the proposed district requirements does not meet the setback requirements for the R-3 zoning district. Based on the size of the site and the possibility of three two-bedroom units, a total of six parking stalls would need to be provided on site. Mr. Hickok stated that this request would also require a landscape plan. At the June 6 Planning Commission meeting, a motion was made to recommend denial of the rezoning request. It passed unanimously. Staff recommends that Council deny the request based on concerns over health, safety, and welfare that have not been properly addressed. The property is not in conformance with the comprehensive plan as a R-3 use and would increase the neighborhood density beyond R-1 standards by allowing up to 15 people. The creation of the required parking lot would change the residential character of the neighborhood. Mr. Hickok stated that the house is very comfortable inside and they have done a nice job. Concerns do exist though. The bathroom floor was substandard and two inspectors could not stand in the bathroom at one time without fear of falling to another level. That has now been tiled and there was no opportunity to look beneath. The petitioners did obtain a building permit on June 26. There have been no inspection updates because there have not been any calls to view the property. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how the inspections normally take place. Mr. Hickok stated that once the building permit is requested, there is a checklist that goes along with the building permit. The permit is the card that goes in the window. The owners call for an inspection when they have reached a certain benchmark spelled out on the checklist or permit. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that a correctional officer called her today and mentioned that he had high respect for the Taylors and the work they do. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 8 Mr. Hickok stated that he was unable to speak with the gentleman directly but had a detailed voice message from him. The gentleman has had a working experience with the Taylors and believes that they are providing a very valuable service to Anoka County. He is concerned that the rezoning request might not be approved and the operation may not continue. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that they do very good work and this home could provide a very valuable service to the community. This however, does not really enter into the rezoning request as such. Criteria has been set up to help make that decision. Ms. Barbara Ellis, 430 Ironton, stated that this home has not been a single family home for ten years. This is the first summer there have been no police reports and it has been quiet. This is a very good thing being done for the City and it should be approved. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Ms. Ellis realized that if it was rezoned, this property could be sold and torn down and made into an apartment building. Ms. Ellis stated that this is needed for people right now. Ms. Catherine Taylor, wife of the petitioner, stated that they were misled when they bought the property. The realtors led them to believe that it was a simple license to obtain after fixing up the property. That is what they did, but they were told the wrong information. This is the only other building they own besides their own home and they have never had opportunity to go through the process. They are waiting for the construction to start and that is why they have not — called for an inspection. They got the residents of the home out and misunderstood what they needed to do next for the rezoning. They did not buy the property from the owner who previously had the special use permit. They pride themselves on keeping the property nice. They want to fix the siding, deck, and landscape the property. They did not understand about the R-2 and R-3 districts. She asked if there was a way to request a rezoning to R-3, as a restricted use for a duplex? Mr. Hickok stated that this is a questionable area. Ms. Taylor stated that they would not go to R-2 because that is considered spot zoning. Two houses down it is R-3 and everything on the left is single family. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Hickok if there was anything in the City considered R-3 with stipulations. Mr. Hickok stated that they do have some with stipulations placed on them. He has concerns about how that reads to a future buyer and that it would possibly create future problems. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that it is now discouraged and only allowed in limited circumstances dealing with transitional zoning. There are provisions in state law allowing additional kinds of uses for a transitional period. As a general rule, the rezoning is a legislative enactment and cannot be made to apply conditionally. — FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 9 Councilmember Bolkcom stated that it might be precedent setting. Mr. Knaak stated that Council will then be required to treat a similar request in the same manner. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that when the special use permit was revoked, Council asked that something be recorded at the County for future buyers. Mr. Hickok stated that every Council action is filed with the County as soon as possible. Mr. Bobby Taylor, petitioner, stated that the work they had done was not cosmetic, and they would not put ceramic tile on a floor that was caving in. He has two different appraisals with him that state that the property is zoned R-2. When they went to look at the property, they saw two separate entrances, two electric meters, and he did not have any reason to think it was anything other than a duplex. They would agree to the granting of this request contingent upon inspections. They are not trying to hide anything from the City. If his intentions were not sincere, he would not have called for the inspection. He said he was proud of the work he had done. Mayor Lund asked if they were requesting rezoning to R-3. Mr. Taylor stated that they wanted R-2 in the beginning. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she does not think that there is anything recorded at Anoka County stating the property is in a R-2 zoning district. Councilmember Wolfe stated that permits are for the property owner's protection. Mr. Taylor stated that once they pull the permits,they are hoping to not have to rip out walls. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to receive the appraisals prepared by Alice Marsh and Michael Martindale. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Burns stated that the issue is that Mr. Taylor did not pull a permit on the work he had done. Mr. Hickok stated that was correct. Mr. Taylor cannot do the work himself because he owns a commercial property. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how many unrelated people could live in this residence at the present time. Mr. Hickok stated that a total of five people can live there. If we are recognizing three units then they each could have one family per unit. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 10 Councilmember Wolfe stated that is if it is rezoned. _ Mr. Hickok stated that was correct. Councilmember Barnette stated that he feels positive toward what the Taylors have done, but the work that has been done still needs to be inspected. He has the most concern with the issue of rezoning to a higher density. He feels badly that the realtor did not understand and misled Mr. and Mrs. Taylor. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that they need to separate these issues. All the inspections and permits were done, and the issue is whether or not the zoning should be R-3. Mr. Taylor stated that at a meeting, a staff member commended what they were doing, but that they were doing it in the wrong place. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that it is in a R-1 district and changing it to R-3 is inappropriate for the neighborhood. There are health and safety and parking issues. Mr. Taylor stated that they are only asking to use the property for what it always has been used for. The density and parking are concerns. He is going to find a family to rent this house to and possibly sell it. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Mr. Taylor can have a rental property. — Mr. Taylor stated that he is very disgusted more than hurt with what he is hearing tonight. Mr. Hickok stated that if you have a single family house and you are living in it and working on it you still need a building permit. Nine people occupied this property when the inspection was conducted. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:52 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated that if this request is denied, the petitioner must still obtain all necessary building permits for the work done to date, and return the home to a single family status by installing a doorway and/or necessary steps between the main floor and the second floor within three months of the denial. Follow up inspection will be done at this time. 14. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 214, SIGNS, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO AUTOMATIC CHANGEABLE SIGNS (ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA #01-01, BY DAKTRONICS, INC.) (TABLED JULY 9,2001): FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 11 MOTION by Councilmember Billings to remove this item from the table. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONTINUED. Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that Daktronics, Inc., a manufacturer of electronic readerboard signs, is requesting a zoning text amendment to remove the City's requirements that automatic changeable signs should not change a message more than once every 15 minutes. The section removed from the zoning text is Section 214.07. 1B. It states as follows: B. The message shall not change more than once every fifteen(15) minutes except for a sign displaying time,temperature, and/or date. Mr. Hickok stated that the major revision to the ordinance in 1976 by a committee made up of City officials, sign company representatives, and the local Chamber of Commerce, has been so effective that the only revisions have been to correct typos or for clarification. This section of code was reviewed in 1984 and 1988 when minor changes were made to the ordinance, but it stayed intact. During the public hearing at the May 16 Planning Commission meeting, the petitioner submitted a petition with 59 signatures requesting that this section of the sign code be eliminated. The Planning Commission denied this request based on pride of the sign code and citing that the special use permit process and variance process were the appropriate ways to address this question. This change would cause additional visual pollution and the frequency of changing messages is seen as a safety hazard. The case is not made strongly enough that this would benefit a very large number of people other than the manufacturers of the signs. Mr. Bolin, Planning Coordinator, stated that staff recommended concurrence with the Planning Commission. The Appeals Commission and this Council denied a request for a variance to this code section last February. Mr. Hickok stated this request does not have wide community support. Staff recommended denial of the zoning text change. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to receive the letter and report from the Chamber of Commerce. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how many other communities around Fridley allow electronic message centers to change more often than Fridley's. Mr. Hickok stated that every one of the bordering cities allows changeable message signs. Some cities across the metropolitan area do not allow the changeable messages at all. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 12 Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there were any surveys of the neighborhood regarding overall support of the changeable messages. Mr. Hickok stated that there have not been. Staff relies on the ordinance passed and when a petition has been submitted, they wait for additional feedback. If they were proposing this text amendment, that is the kind of research they would do to make a strong case. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that they have received a petition from business owners but have not heard opposition to the requested change. Mr. Hickok stated that they have not heard opposition or support from the community. Councilmember Wolfe stated that he does not have any problem with this at all. The fifteen- minute change seems ridiculous, and the City itself could have one. These signs look neater than billboards. A study could be conducted on any accidents they may cause. A stipulation for change every five minutes instead of fifteen could be added. Mayor Lund stated that his concern is that this is fine for now, but the cost may go down and the signs could get bigger, and pretty soon it would look like Las Vegas down University Avenue. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that each business is only allowed eighty square feet. She would like to have less signs in the community. Councilmember Barnette stated that several people have asked him why the Emmanuel Community Center Church sign was allowed. This sign is not located in Fridley. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how big that sign was. Mr. Hickok stated that he would say it is about 80 square feet. Mr. Kelly Koenig, Daktronics, stated that he apologizes for their disappearance during the last meeting. They were informed the issue would be tabled and there was no reason they needed to stay. They did not think there would be a discussion. Mayor Lund stated that when the question was posed to Council prior to the meeting, he stated that they advertised for this and felt they must hold the public hearing and they would consider tabling it. Mr. Koenig stated that the issue of non-interest in the sign is not a concern. They have signatures from 59 businesses and have the support of the Chamber of Commerce. In their own independent investigation, only one person did not want this. Mr. Mike Hart, owner of American Masonry at 77th and East River Road, does not have any consumer product and a bid- only business. He wanted a message center to have a community billboard. He has cleaned up the corner of 77th and East River Road to add one. They conducted a valid survey and asked a good number of individuals. About eighty-seven percent (87%) of those said they thought the FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 13 signs were aesthetically appealing. Three percent (3%) stated that they did not like signs altogether and ten percent(10%) were not willing to form an opinion. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the poll asked whether electronic message boards were pleasing to the eye. Mr. Koenig stated that they asked two questions. The first question was if they felt Fridley business owners should have the same sign code restrictions as other communities that border Fridley. They said "sure". Most stated that they prefer the look of the message centers. With the changeable copy boards the letters are too small to be read if there is five lines of copy. Those are more of a visual clutter than an electronic message center. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the issue is whether to allow electronic message centers to change at a more frequent rate. Mr. Koenig stated that the opinion of many Planning Commission members was that it was visual clutter. Mr. Hickok stated that in a survey presenting side by side pictures asking which one people liked better, there was no question that there was one that was clean and one that was not. The one that was clean in the survey presented was the one that is permitted by code today. It is important to talk about the signs and survey also. Councilmember Wolfe stated that if someone asked him the same thing, he would assume the sign would change for advertising. Most people in the computer world would expect the signs to change once in a while. He does not think that people would get into an accident by reading the signs. They are sharper and neater and easier to read. Every building can only have one sign. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that some of the property at 77th and East River Road would be destroyed to construct an electronic sign. Mr. Koenig has a vested interest but probably not a lot of people would buy electronic message boards unless they can change them on a regular basis. As Councilmember Barnette mentioned, some businesses might have signs that would not have had them before. Councilmember Wolfe asked her what she would rather see for a sign on that property. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that they were not there to discuss whether or not to have electronic signs because they are allowed. It is whether they can be changed more often. Mr. Koenig stated that it will not be Las Vegas because of the square feet limit. The message on the signs can stay the same, but the background color may change. Mr. Dennis Mellem, Signcrafters, stated that Spring Lake Park has a very nice liquor store down the road that has a nice message center. The one in Fridley does not have one. Is that fair? FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 14 Councilmember Billings stated that the Fridley store meets the Fridley sign code and we are not • in the position to change the sign code in Spring Lake Park. The question is totally inappropriate. Mr. Mahlum stated that the difference is advertisements. Mr. Koenig stated that by allowing businesses to advertise, the fees and charges that you are increasing to ten percent (10%) in your community could be eliminated. You could increase your revenue by increasing business revenue. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the City cannot raise the fees and they cannot be more than what it takes to administer the cost of those permits and inspections. They are not related to making money for Fridley. Councilmember Billings asked if by using these signs, businesses would automatically have an increase in business. Mr. Koenig stated that they would not automatically. It depends on the content of the signs. Councilmember Billings asked if a business owner in Fridley would not be doing justice to the owners of the businesses to not have a sign in front of their business that changes every few seconds. If this will make every business prosper and have more revenue, every business is going want one. He is looking for some evidence to support that statement. -- Mr. Koenig stated that studies on a testimonial basis of businesses that are successful can actually say that their business increased. Mr. Jon Rider, Attractasign, stated that the issue is will Council allow the messages to change. The ordinance was written in 1984 and amended in 1988. The computer industry and the size of the machines make message centers much more effective. The sign code is generous in Fridley but this would be one item to take a look at. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if a notice of this hearing was published. Mr. Hickok stated that there was not any special promotion on the signs. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that in reality, if people object to this, they probably do not even know about this unless they happened to see the last Council meeting. Mr. Harris stated that he was part of the committee and planning process of forming this sign code. At the time, it was pretty good. The technology has since changed dramatically. Back then, we were working with a scrolling message on a board. So that there was not a continuous message, the committee suggested the fifteen-minute rule. The committee thought a continuous message would cause a safety problem. This may be a good time to take a look at the sign _ ordinance and bring it up to date with new technology. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 15 Mayor Lund asked what would prevent a continuous message from occurring if the 15-minute restriction was removed. Mr. Harris stated that an in-depth study could come up with a better ordinance to handle the new technology rather than the twenty-five year old technology. Councilmember Barnette stated that Mr. Harris and Daktronics have a good point. Times have changed and he is probably going to vote for denial at this time. It may be time to look at this. Councilmember Billings stated that he received the same message from the Chamber of Commerce about whether or not the readerboards looked good. The case is whether or not they should be changing more frequently than what the City Code allows. The report from the Chamber of Commerce has no reference to how many of the accidents are in northbound or southbound University or where you could see the sign. If there is no preclusion to having these types of signs in town, they are allowed and the messages will stay there for up to fifteen minutes at a time. The Department of Transportation uses these signs in areas where there is nothing to distract people. The fact that they are using signs that do change frequently like on 1-694 with two panels to advertise, is a signal that catches a person's eye and cause them to take their eye off the roadway to read that sign. Emmanuel Church's sign is seen from blocks away. Two people have come in looking for a variance in the last ten years. Neither were requests that were burning issues that needed something that is changed more frequently than 15 minutes with community event advertising. He agrees with Councilmember Wolfe about changing it to five or three minutes or some length of time equal to or greater than the length of time it takes for the average car traveling at the average posted speed to go through the area. He has not seen anything convincing him that it would be a detriment not to have the message centers. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. 15. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 402 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO WATER AND SEWER ADMINISTRATION -REPAIRS TO CONNECTION: MOTION by Councilmember Billings to waive the reading and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Mr. Otteson, Assistant Public Works Director, stated that this amendment is to clarify the responsibility of the property owners to perform standard maintenance on their sanitary sewer service versus the City's responsibility to repair a damaged service between the property line and the City main. The increase in affordable sewer inspection technology, such as mini-television FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 16 cameras, has allowed many sewer service cleaning contractors to visually inspect and locate _. problems prior to cleaning. Blockages beyond the property line are wrongly interpreted sometimes, and a claim is submitted to the City. The City has no control over what is put into these service lines and no way to inspect or maintain them. The City will continue to work with residents on determining the type and location of a problem and immediately responding to any reported back-up. This text amendment will clarify the City's long-standing policy that it is the property owner's responsibility to perform standard maintenance, including clearing debris or root cutting for the entire length of the service line from the building to the City main. A video with Dr. Burns and Mr. Kottsick, the sewer supervisor, regarding this issue is showing on cable right now. Staff recommended accepting the zoning text amendment. Mr. Burns stated that an article on sewer maintenance and responsibility on sewer maintenance will be in the next City newsletter. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if people would have known about this public hearing from the tiny little section in the back of the paper. Mayor Lund asked if this was a substantive change or a clarification. Mr. Otteson stated that it is a clarification. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if some residents interpreted that any time they have a back-up, the City pays for it. Mr. Otteson stated that they are interpreting that between the property line to the sewer main in the street area is the City's responsibility for a back-up. It is the property owner's responsibility all the way from the house to the sewer main. If a sewer line collapses in the City's right-of-way, the City will repair it. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how often inspections are made. Mr. Burns stated that 20 percent (20%) of the sewer lines are inspected per year, or one-fifth of the City is inspected every year. If an individual is having repeated problems, City staff will inspect the sewer line. Councilmember Barnette stated that if a homeowner has a private service come and clean out a sewer back-up in their own home, it is a good idea to contact the City. Some people may be reluctant to do so in case it causes problems with a neighbor's sewer line. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that the City is not liable due to a sewer service causing roots or debris to back up a neighbor's sewer. It is quite possible if someone causes an obstruction that the property owner who called the service would be liable. Mr. Burns stated that the inspection will make sure the roots are causing a problem. _ Mayor Lund stated that it is helpful for people to cooperate. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 17 Councilmember Bolkcom stated that many people do not realize a special rider is required on your insurance to cover a sewer back-up. Mayor Lund stated that it is not typical to have sewer coverage for back-ups and there is a rider to the policy available for a minimal fee. If there is a blockage in the right-of-way area, whose liability is it if it backs up into the owner's home? Mr. Otteson stated that blockage would be due to the line not being maintained. Mayor Lund stated that the City will repair a break in that area. If that break causes a problem whose responsibility is that? Mr. Knaak stated that it depends on whose fault it is. Mayor Lund stated that due to age and ground shifting the pipe may break. Mr. Knaak stated that the City can adopt a policy on a no-fault basis to accept responsibility for that purpose. It is a special rider for the City. The issue is that this is so difficult in terms of litigation and finding fault that it is a service the City can provide. The City has accepted that to do maintenance on those lines is not an agreement on the part of the City to be liable for everything that happens there. If there is an ongoing maintenance problem, the property owner could be liable. This creates a duty on the part of the citizens to maintain the line. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how the residents would know how often to have them maintained. Mr. Burns stated that you really do not have to be worried about it until the flow from your own source slows down. Then you have to check for roots. You do not need to do preventive maintenance. Mr. Otteson stated that it is after the first problem that you should do it yearly or bi-yearly. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 10:30 P.M. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 18 NEW BUSINESS: 6. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-34 ORDERING PRELIMINARY PLANS, SPECIFI- CATIONS AND ESTIMATES OF THE COSTS THEREOF:UTILITY PROJECT NO. 342: and 7. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-35 RECEIVING THE PRELIMINARY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MATTER OF CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS UTILITY PROJECT NO. 342: Councilmember Wolfe stated that he was uncomfortable with this item. The development agreement is very difficult to interpret. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that this is through their office, and is standard procedure. He was directed at the Council meeting to proceed to enforce a development agreement between the City and Mr. Varichak. The agreement has been interpreted consistently by the City to require the installation of sewer lines up to the lot lines. The developer has resisted doing this. The City has reviewed a number of options and the best option is to have this operate as any other kind of public improvement involving sewer installation. It is authorized by Minnesota State Statute 429. The issue is whether or not a public hearing should be scheduled. The merits of the project — would be addressed at that time. Mr. Knaak stated that this process does not require the existence of a development agreement. Prospective purchasers of the parcels would have a need to precipitate the construction of this kind of project as it adds an assessable improvement to the property. That is why this method was chosen. It is not really about the development agreement. The issues will be addressed during the public hearing. Mr. Burns stated that the initiation of this action is founded in State law and independent of the development agreement. Mayor Lund stated that this can be discussed under Item No. 7. Mr. Knaak stated that was correct. Councilmember Wolfe stated that there are issues that he feels very strongly about. Mr. Knaak stated that the City has a good reason for taking the position that it would take if the issue were to enforce the development agreement alone. That is not what this action requested is about directly. When and if Council decides to proceed further after the public hearing, the issue of who pays for it comes up. That is not really before Council. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 19 Councilmember Wolfe stated that he is not taking sides but has questions on how the agreement is written. Ms. Susan Okerstrom, 1601 Gardena Avenue, stated that they did not have any knowledge of the development agreement and were led to believe they were buying a finished lot. If this goes to trial, their testimony would be that they received a copy of the development agreement during the closing undated, unsigned, and not notarized. It was not disclosed on the purchase agreement or the contract for deed closing papers. Universal Title insurance company admits they did not disclose it prior to or at the time of closing. She asked if Fridley allows developers to do business this way and deceive people who are buying property. Mayor Lund stated that will be discussed during the public hearing. Ms. Okerstrom stated that in a special assessment, they will be paying unless Mr. Varichak and Mr. Surdyk are sued. Ms. Angelique Frederiksen, 1601 Gardena Avenue, stated that it seems like the City is trying to use another way to get around getting .the sewer and water in without having to enforce the development agreement. As property owners with title, they would end up having to take recourse through legal actions. Mr. Knaak stated that it is important that this is part of the process. The City can take whatever legal action it deems necessary to enforce the development agreement. What was brought to the Council's and City's attention was a compelling and immediate need to have the connection done and the best way was the usual process contemplated in the public hearing. If something is going to be built, it will have to be done through this process which does not resolve the dispute with the sellers of the property. Regardless of what happens, you and the sellers are likely to be having conversations of who should pay for that. Ms. Frederiksen stated that it is the City's responsibility to enforce the development agreement. Mayor Lund asked if she was suggesting that the City take the developers to court to enforce the agreement? Mr. Knaak stated that discussing remediation is hazardous and that is not what is on the agenda. The City was asked to move quickly on the sewer lines and the public hearing is a step closer to doing that. The City has never failed to enforce a development agreement. Ms. Frederiksen asked if the issue of how it will be assessed will be brought up. What recourse does the City take at that time? They requested at the last City Council meeting that the City enforce the development agreement with the developers. Mr. Knaak stated that the request was to move forward and get the process going in terms of building their sewer line. That would potentially happen under Council's discretion. There is no quick fix. This is the immediate solution even though down the line you and the sellers will have active conversations. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 20 ••••..•Ms. Okerstrom stated that unless they pay off the lot and they are owners of record, they cannot get a building permit and build on the property. They will be assessed and have to go through legal recourse. Mr. Knaak stated that if Council decides to conduct a public hearing, and they decide that they do not want to be assessed,that would be the time to tell Council. Mayor Lund stated that they may want to consult their attorney. Ms. Okerstrom stated her attorney is Mr. Thoreson. She said she hoped that this has not happened before and the City's intent is to have a developer follow through and put in City water to the street. The City needs to enforce these agreements. They never signed anything saying that they were responsible for the development agreement. The City's assessment of the property is not something that is appropriate or fair. The developer should be sued. Ms. Beverly Wales, 9509 Dogwood Avenue North, stated that she did not know there was a meeting tonight until Ms. Okerstrom told her. Her lot may cost her $33,000 and she does not understand why she was not notified. Councilmember Billings stated that two items are on the agenda. The first item is an official action by the City Council to direct the Public Works staff to draw plans and specifications for doing the work. The second item is to set a public hearing date and notify anyone that we know of that has an interest in the property. These are the only decisions tonight. After the public hearing on August 13 a vote will be taken by the City Council to proceed with the project. Ms. Wales asked if this project was a result of what happened during the open forum at the last Council meeting. Mr. Knaak stated that may have been the thing that precipitated additional action of the City, but no,this was going to be handled anyway. Ms. Wales asked when the City would get back to her as to what the resolution or plan is. Mr. Burns stated that would be August 13. Councilmember Billings stated that the City Attorney is still reviewing the options in terms of any enforcement. • Ms. Wales asked if she would be notified. Councilmember Barnette stated that she should plan on being at the meeting on August 13. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to adopt Resolution No. 34-2001, Ordering Preliminary Plans, Specifications, and Estimates of the Costs Thereof: Utility Project No. 342. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 21 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to adopt Resolution No. 35-2001, Receiving the Preliminary Report and Calling for a Public Hearing on the Matter of Construction of Certain Improvements: Utility Project No. 342. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN OF A REPLACEMENT PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E.: Councilmember Barnette stated that Mr. Harris wanted this removed for discussion. Mr. Richard Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace, stated that this should have never happened. He examined the bridge piers today and looked at it when it was laying on top of the truck. It was poorly designed. There should have been controlled caution bars at the end of the alleyway. He does not want this to happen again. He asked if there were any plans. He also wanted to know how the City got this bridge without proper design. Councilmember Billings asked him what he meant by improper design and construction. Mr. Harris stated that the only thing holding that bridge together was the railing. Councilmember Billings stated that it was designed by an architectural firm. Mr. Harris asked if there was a problem with the construction manager. Mr. Burns stated that a partner in the company left during the construction process. Mr. Harris asked if the new bridge would be raised with caution bars at each end of the driveway. Mayor Lund stated that Mr. Harris raised very good points of interest and the City would look at that in the design process. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that they would take all this into account and present his information. Mr. Harris stated that he is concerned with the integrity of the whole parking ramp. Mayor Lund asked if ramps were inspected periodically. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 22 Mr. Hickok stated that he believes that there are inspections to make sure the integrity is there. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to receive the bids and award the contract for the investigation and design of a replacement pedestrian bridge to Krech, O'Brien, Mueller & Wass, Inc., in the amount of$7,252.00. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.2001-1: Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the reason the City is replacing the curb boxes is because there are leaks and they all need to be replaced. Mr. Otteson, Assistant Public Works Director, stated that the present boxes do not meet current health codes. They had weep holes in them when they were installed, allowing for the possibility of contamination to get into the water supply. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that it would be helpful to have the exact budget information. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve Change Order No. 1 to Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2001-1 in the amount of$14,330.00. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OLD BUSINESS: 16. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 214, SIGNS, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO AUTOMATIC CHANGEABLE SIGNS (ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA #01-01, BY DAKTRONICS, INC.)(TABLED JULY 9,2001): MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to deny approval of the first reading of an ordinance to amend Chapter 214, Signs, of the Fridley City Code. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. Mayor Lund stated that he still has questions relating to this and it could be reviewed and brought up again. UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND AND COUNCILMEMBERS BARNETTE, BOLKCOM AND BILLINGS VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE VOTING NAY,MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED 4-1. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 23 17. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS (ZOA #01-02, BY BOBBY TAYLOR, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 401 IRONTON STREET N.E.)(WARD 3) (TABLED JUNE 18,2001): MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to deny approval of the first reading of an ordinance to amend the City Code of the Fridley City Code. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Hickok to notify Mr. and Mrs. Taylor. NEW BUSINESS: 18. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 402 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO WATER AND SEWER ADMINISTRATION—REPAIRS TO CONNECTION: MOTION by Councilmember Billings to waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 19. VARIANCE REQUEST,VAR#01-09,BY RICHARD AND MARY NORDSTROM, TO REDUCE THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE GARAGE WITH LIVING SPACE ABOVE THE GARAGE, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 145 HARTMAN CIRCLE (WARD 3): Mr. Hickok stated that the petitioners are seeking to reduce the side yard between the property line and living space from 10 feet to 4.58 feet, and the side yard setback for an attached garage from 5 feet to 4.58 feet to construct an 18 foot by 28 foot attached garage addition with living space above. The house is sitting skewed on the lot and the southwest corner of the house is where the variance is needed. The proposed addition will exceed 1,000 square feet by 148 square feet. The petitioner indicated that part will be his workshop so he can separate that off and stay within the 1,000 square foot maximum. That is an acceptable alternative. Mr. Hickok stated that staff visited the site and noted there are options without needing a variance. One would be reducing the addition size to 12 by 28 feet to gain both garage and living space. A detached garage could be constructed in the rear of the property and a drive could be brought around the west side of the garage to access the new garage. The petitioner's hardship statement is as follows: "We have two large silver maples in the backyard and the trunks of the trees are over 30 inches in diameter. One of the trees is directly behind the kitchen to the north of the lot and there is no way to add this addition to the north without taking down these lovely silver maples. We have four vehicles and there is a useful purpose for every one of FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 24 them. I would with the addition be able to store these vehicles inside and not have to keep two _, of them in the driveway all year long." Mr. Hickok stated that staff determined that these options would not affect the maples and has not identified a real hardship. Staff recommended denial. A real hardship is that one property cannot be put to reasonable use if used under the requirements of the Code. There are no physical characteristics for unique property conditions. Staff demonstrated that alternatives do exist. The variance should not alter the character of the neighborhood. Setbacks provide green space and emergency space for emergencies and lessen crowding in the neighborhoods. The height of the living area would be out of character for the neighborhood. The Appeals Commission concurred that there is no real hardship. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the Nordstroms knew this was on the agenda. Mr. Hickok stated that he called them today to notify them, and staff has been in contact with them. Ms. Alice Nelson, 149 Hartman Circle, stated that she feels the addition would be out of character with an immense wall. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that they could build without a variance. They could build and still have a workshop or shed. She asked if the 60-day action is up tonight. Councilmember Billings stated that Mr. Nordstrom could build a garage that is 17.58 feet by 28 feet, and he could build a living space that is roughly 12.5 feet by 28 feet. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to deny VAR #01-09. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 20. REQUEST FOR A ONE-YEAR LICENSE EXTENSION FOR A TEMPORARY OFFICE TRAILER LOCATED AT 7501 COMMERCE LANE N.E.(WARD 3): Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that one year ago on July 24, the City Council approved a temporary trailer license for Lombardi Meats. The license was issued for one year until the building addition was complete. Mr. Michael Gow, Director of Sales and Operations, indicated that the addition has not been constructed as anticipated. Funds will be requested at the parent office to construct the office addition in October of this year. Spring construction is anticipated if approved. Staff has received a call from a neighboring industry requesting that the license for the extension not be granted. Primary concerns are the appearance of the temporary structure and Lombardi's unpaved driveway. Staff recommended a one-year approval coinciding with the facts about their building plans for 2002 but no future extensions beyond July 2002. Staff also recommends the discontinuation of the use of the gravel drive with FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 25 restoration of black dirt and turf to a hard surface drive with concrete, curb, and gutter, and concrete or asphalt drive surface. Councilmember Bolkcom asked when the gravel drive went in. Mr. Hickok stated that he did not know. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she talked with Mr. Dennis Olson, the neighboring property owner, who remembers a conversation with Ms. Dacy and Lombardi Meats in which they indicated that they only wanted it for one year. He agreed only because it was for one year. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that they could ask them to discontinue using the driveway or to pave it. Mr. Hickok stated that was correct. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she is leaning toward the 90-day extension option. Mayor Lund asked if there was a concrete apron. Mr. Hickok stated that this driveway came after their hard surface drive and apparently whenever this was approved, it probably evolved without a permit. The records do not show a permit. Councilmember Billings stated that they could have requested a second apron. It is too bad they are not here to answer these questions. One year ago they indicated they needed the trailer for one year and the only logical conclusion he can draw is that they would be operating from a temporary trailer and drive and may be in the process of determining whether this is the best location for their facility. Councilmember Barnette asked about the 90-day extension. Councilmember Billings stated that he does not want to put them out of business. Lombardi Meats indicated to him that they only use the trailer for sales people. The site on University Avenue has two commercial office buildings both of which have signs out that there is space available for rent. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to deny the one-year extension but allow the trailer to stay for 90 days as the business seeks alternatives for addressing their space needs. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIEDUNANIMOUSLY. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23,2001 PAGE 26 21. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: ._.. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Council could review the video that Mr. Strand and Mr. Burns participated in on a property in the Riverview Terrace area. 22. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE JULY 23, 2001, CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, t2e3/744,01,--L__ Signe L. Johnson Scott Lund Recording Secretary Mayor