Loading...
CCM 09/17/2001 THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF SEPTEMBER 17 ,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. PROCLAMATIONS: Student Foreign Exchange Week:September 17-23, 2001 Jose Escobar- Paraguay Teemu Narhi -Finland Alejandro Rios -Bolivia Mayor Lund welcomed all the students and stated that he hoped their stay was going well. Mr. Jose Escobar stated that he is a senior at Fridley High School and thanked Council for inviting them tonight. Mr. Teemu Narhi stated that he is a senior at Fridley High School and he is glad that he has had this opportunity. Mr. Alejandro Rios stated that he is a senior at Totino-Grace High School and also likes it very much. Mayor Lund stated that it is the desire of the City of Fridley to show its appreciation and support to our distinguished guests. Mr. Bill Anderson and Ms. Karen Jones, from Fridley V.F.W. Post 363, welcomed the students and presented them with flags and pencils. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 2 Domestic Violence Awareness Month: October, 2001 Mayor Lund stated that domestic violence will be eliminated through community partnerships of concerned individuals and organizations working together to prevent abuse, while at the same time promoting social and legal change. Ms. Jenny Haider from Alexandra House stated that a candlelight vigil will be held on October 18 in remembrance of women and families who have been killed in Anoka County. They will also look at the work that has been done and how they are moving forward. The proclamations they have received will be displayed at the Anoka County Government Center. She thanked Fridley for its support. Ms. Haider stated that Alexandra House, offers shelter and community resources. She said they see a lot of families from Fridley. Fire Prevention Week: October 7 -13, 2001 Mayor Lund stated that the vast majority of home cooking, heating, and electrical fires can be prevented by taking simple safety precautions. Mr. Messer, Fridley Fire Marshal, stated that the Fire Department will have an open house on Saturday, October 6, from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Many demonstrations will be held. If anyone has any questions,they can contact the Fire Department. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the Proposed Consent Agenda with the removal of Item#3. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of September 10, 2001. APPROVED. NEW BUSINESS: 1. RECEIVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 5, 2001: RECEIVED. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 3 2. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #01-09, BY VIRGIL OKESON, TO ALLOW A SECOND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (GARAGE), GENERALLY LOCATED AT 1423 - 641H AVENUE N.E. (WARD 2): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this would allow the construction of a 672 square foot accessory structure to be used for storage of boats,trailers, and lawn equipment. The Planning Commission approved it at their September 5 meeting. Staff recommended Council's approval. APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #01-09, BY VIRGIL OKESON, WITH THE FOLLOWING SIX STIPULATIONS: 1. STAFF SHALL CONDUCT REGULAR INSPECTIONS OF THE SITE. IF, AT ANY TIME, A TRAIL SIMULATING A DRIVEWAY IS PRESENT, A HARD SURFACE DRIVEWAY AS APPROVED BY THE CITY WILL NEED TO BE INSTALLED WITHIN 90 DAYS. 2. PETITIONER SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3. THE STRUCTURE SHALL NOT BE USED FOR A HOME OCCUPATION OR LIVING AREA. 4. ALL VEHICLES SHALL BE STORED ON A HARD SURFACE AS APPROVED BY THE CITY. 5. TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ALL ACCESSORY STRUCTURES MUST NOT EXCEED 1,400 SQUARE FEET. 6. GARAGE SHALL BE ARCHITECTURALLY COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING HOME AND FINISHED WITH A COMPLEMENTARY SIDE AND COLOR SCHEME. 3. APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR A FINAL PLAT, PS #01-02, BY GEORGE BATESON, TO ALLOW FIVE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, ,_, GENERALLY LOCATED AT HEATHER PLACE AND CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. (WARD 2): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that is a five-plot plat in the Heather Hills North II Plat. The final plat was approved by Council on August 13. Staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 48-2001 DIRECTING PREPARATION OF THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE 2001 NUISANCE ABATEMENT: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this is for costs associated with the Nuisance Abatement Project for 2001. There was one assessment at between $300 to $400. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 48-2001. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 4 5. RESOLUTION NO. 49-2001 DIRECTING PUBLICATION OF HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE 2001 NUISANCE ABATEMENT: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the hearing notice will be in the September 27 issue of the Focus News. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 49-2001. 6. RESOLUTION 50-2001 DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE STINSON BOULEVARD STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2001 -2: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the total project cost is about $40,000. It will be assessed against benefited property owners at the rate of$9,600 each. The assessments shall be extended over a period of ten years. The first installment will be due the first Monday in January, 2002. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 50-2001. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 51-2001 DIRECTING PUBLICATION OF THE HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR THE STINSON BOULEVARD STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST.2001 -2: .—. Mr. Burns stated that the public hearing is scheduled for publication in the Focus News on September 27. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 51-2001. 8. CLAIMS: APPROVED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 101506 - 101665. 9. LICENSES: APPROVED ALL LICENSES AS SUBMITTED. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Billings to adopt the Agenda with the addition Item 3 from the consent agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 5 OPEN FORUM,VISITORS: No persons in the audience spoke. NEW BUSINESS: 3. APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR A FINAL PLAT, PS #01-02, BY GEORGE BATESON, TO ALLOW FIVE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, GENERALLY LOCATED AT HEATHER PLACE AND CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. (WARD 2): Councilmember Billings asked if it was a stipulation that the development agreement be executed. Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that there was not a stipulation on the plat, however, the developer was aware that a development agreement would be prepared and would be on this agenda. Councilmember Billings asked if it was changing anything on the stipulations because he understood that the development agreement had already been approved by the City Council. Mr. Hickok stated that was correct. Staff was working on development agreements for two developments at the time the final plat came before Council. We had constant communication with the developer and he was aware that the development agreement would be forthcoming and that it agreement would have to go to the County for the final recording. He has reviewed it, agreed to all the stipulations and terms, and signed it. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve a development agreement for a Final Plat, PS #01-02, by George Bateson. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 10. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE ON RECREATIONAL VEHICLE PARKING: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:12 P.M. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 6 Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that this item is to consider storage of boats, campers, and trailers. Systematic code enforcement in 1998 revealed that a number of property owners were storing utility trailers, camper trailers, and boats in their front yards and on their driveways. As a result of those discoveries, it led to discussion and ultimately to survey questions. Two variance requests by residents in 1999 asked to be able to park travel trailers in the driveway in the front of their home. They were both denied. A survey of surrounding communities finds that Fridley's ordinance falls in the middle of what is allowed in other communities. Andover requires parking on a hard surface in a building or off-site. Non- motorized vehicles must be parked on a hard surface, grass only on rear yard not visible from the public right-of-way, and it must be parked ten feet back from any property line. The recreational vehicles must be less than 20 feet in length to be kept on a residential property. Blaine requires parking on a hard surface and must be three feet back from the property lines. You can be parked on the grass or gravel in the side or rear yard. Brooklyn Park requires parking on a hard surface which must be five feet back from property lines. Columbia Heights requires parking on a hard surface with no specifications as to where. Coon Rapids requires hard surface parking on the side, front or rear yard. Crystal has no specification on what type of surface to be parked on but you can park on the side or rear yard and must be no closer than ten feet from neighboring dwellings. Ramsey requires hard surface parking on the driveway, side, or rear yard. Shoreview requires hard surface parking on the driveway, front, side, or rear yard, 30 feet back from front property line and 5 feet from the side property line, and 10 feet from the rear property line. Spring Lake Park has no specifications as to what type of surface. Parking is permitted in the front and side yard, but must be five feet from any side property line. Councilmember Billings asked if there was an overall recap of the cities in general. Mr. Hickok stated that there were different requirements found in the cities, and that the many ordinances were not being enforced. Mr. Burns asked if all the other communities allow non-motorized camper trailers on the driveway. Mr. Hickok stated that they do, and Fridley was unique in not allowing them. Fridley allows current outdoor storage in the side and rear yard for non-motorized boats, trailers, and campers. Motorized RVs are required to be parked on a paved surface. Staff recommended that in order to ensure enforcement, we select an option. Option 1 would be to leave the ordinance as it is or repeal the existing language and allow outdoor storage in front yards. Additional language could be added to the existing code that would prohibit front yard parking of RVs. Option 2 allows outdoor storage in all portions of the yards in residential districts. A motorized vehicle would be permitted on the driveway. In Option 3, language would be added that would state that motorhomes on driveways or in front yards would be prohibited. It combines the existing language for side and rear parking and would put the motor home behind the house on a paved surface or off-site storage. Councilmember Wolfe stated that he is glad the front yard/driveway issue has been cleared up. Many people do not mind the driveway placement versus placement on the grass in the front yard. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 7 Mr. Gerald Sadowski, 250 Rice Creek Boulevard N.E., stated that he has lived in other communities with ordinances that state that no recreational vehicles can be parked on the property anywhere except overnight. He owns five recreational vehicles and stores all of them outside the City. He hopes his neighbors will do the same. He respects strict enforcement. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if he was talking about RVs or boats. Mr. Sadowski stated that he was talking about RVs, boats, utility trailers, and all. Mr. Jack Larson, 740 Pandora Drive N.E., stated that he is perturbed with the ordinance mostly because of motorhomes. He pulls his fifth wheel with a pick-up and he pays as much for a license as an owner of a motorhome. He is not asking for a full year of storage but would settle for May 15 through September 15. A motorhome parked on the driveway would be blocking the view from the neighbors but they are allowed. He thanks the Council and Mayor for allowing this, but feels discriminated against. Storage does not work out very well, especially when repairs need to be made. Councilmember Barnette asked him if he went out of town with it from Friday to Monday and would he need to store it on Tuesday and Wednesday. Mr. Larson stated that was correct and he still has to pay the full amount of storage fees for the month. Mr. Bill Erickson, 7341 Memory Lane N.E., stated that he built a pad on his driveway for a boat. He thinks the ordinance says storage and he believes it should be parking. He stores the boat during the winter and parks it there during the summer because he uses it two or three times a week for fishing. The ordinance should read that vehicles could be parked on the driveway from April 15 to October 15. Mayor Lund asked him what his neighbors think. Mr. Erickson stated that they have no objection whatsoever. The boats in the neighborhood are nice looking and have covers and do not distract from the neighborhood at all. He would have to impose on his neighbor's property to park the boat on the side of the house. His boat is a 16 foot fishing boat. Councilmember Wolfe stated that many people have built a cement pad for their boat that they cannot use. Mr. and Mrs. Jim Reisner, 1624 Pierce Street, stated that their travel trailer hopefully can be parked in their driveway for the summer months. It is stored in the winter. Neighbors do not have any bad things to say about it. Mr. Reisner stated that they have neighbors here on their behalf. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 8 Ms. Reisner stated that they use their travel trailer from May 15 to November. It is 30 feet and there is still room for the pick-up in front of it. Councilmember Barnette stated that their home was set back quite a ways. Councilmember Wolfe asked if they had a problem with people storing snowmobiles in the winter. Ms. Reisner stated that they do not. Their neighbor has a couch in front of the garage. Mr. Reisner stated that he is all for allowing family-oriented vehicles to be easily accessible for more traveling and fun trips. Mayor Lund stated that he agrees, but everyone who has an RV wants to park it in their front driveway. Everyone who does not have one does not want it because they see it sitting there for weeks on end. This is being neighborly and considerate. Mr. Joe Nelson, 1357 - 64th Avenue, stated that he suggests a time period for these vehicles. He invested$3,000 for extending the width of the driveway and that was not enough. He was told to put the trailer next to the house and extended the driveway further and now has $6,000 in concrete. He is in compliance with City ordinance and has a large enough setback on the side of his home to allow that. Many people have smaller yards and setbacks. He asked what the typical side yard setback was. .—. Mr. Hickok stated that it is about 10 feet from the property line to the house. Mr. Nelson stated that storage becomes a problem as well as servicing them. May through September would be a fair solution for parking. Mr. Jim Rusinak, 6412 Pierce, stated that he does not have an RV but this does not bother him. Blue collar people need their recreation and he likes to see people get out. He has no problem with parking in the driveway. Mr. John Bolich, 1580 - 60th Avenue N.E., stated that he has a large fifth wheel camper parked during the summer. He needs a definition of parking and storage. He uses his continuously through the summer and parks it in the driveway and stores it alongside the house during the winter. Maintenance is essential and storage does not work out when you are using it a lot. This ordinance can be an obstacle to using the vehicles by parking them far away. There is a lot of vandalism while vehicles are in storage. Mayor Lund asked for clarification of parking versus storage. Mr. Hickok stated that it is difficult to enforce not knowing if the vehicles are in the driveway to be serviced. Storage is for any period of time. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 9 Mr. Charles Anderson, 5375 Matterhorn Drive N.E., stated that he had a question about motorhomes. He has a 24 foot motorhome parked in front of his house with ramps to hold the front end up to be level to use the refrigerator. His neighbors have no problem with the motorhome. He put his motorhome in storage in Spring Lake Park because he decided that it did not look good from his neighbor's house. It went through two hail storms, two break-ins, and a lot of expense. It is now costing him $2,400 per year to rent a garage. He never had a problem when it was stored in front of the house and would like to put the motorhome in the driveway to work on it. Mr. Harvey Kienholz, 821 Rice Creek Terrace N.E., stated that he has an 8-foot pop-top camper. He had it parked in his driveway for about 1 1/2 weeks and got the letter to move it. If it is not an eyesore, a person should be able to keep it in the driveway. If he could have parked the boat outside in the last hail storm rather than having to put his car there, it would have saved a lot of the damage to the car. Mr. Virgil Okeson, 1423 - 64th Avenue N.E., stated that there are about eight people in his neighborhood who that have some kind of recreational vehicle. The neighbors have not stated that they disapprove of the vehicles in the driveway. We also have to be fair and allow the snowmobiles to be parked on the driveway. Mr. Bruce Vranish, 7573 Lyric Lane N.E., stated that another option could provide for visitors that come to the City. His in-laws drove their motorhome from Florida and there was not room in the driveway. They called the City to see if they could park it on the street. The City never called back with an answer. Unity Hospital allowed them to park in the parking lot of the nursing home. He does not see the difference between these recreational vehicles and cars sitting in the driveway. Some cars are more of an eyesore. A typical driveway layout is not in the center of the lot, which does not allow room pads beside the house for the motorhomes to sit level. Mr. Ray Reynolds, 7426 Bacon Drive N.E., stated that he had a travel trailer that was vandalized while parked off site. They put a pad in and bought a motorhome at much expense. There was no way to get it next to the house or put it in the backyard. Mr. Mervin Herrmann, 278 Mercury Drive N.E., stated that they have a mini-motor home and a trailer. They park the travel trailer at the lake most of the time in the summer but in the winter they usually take it south. He said they do park the motor home in the backyard in the winter and asked if the motor home was allowed to be parked there. Councilmember Barnette stated that the motorhome is allowed on the driveway but the trailer is not. Mr. Hickok stated that the motorhome would be allowed in the rear yard on a hard surface. Mr. Herman stated that the trailer is used into November and the October time period would not fit them very well. It was vandalized while in storage. He said they have been doing this for 40 years. He does not think that Fridley should eliminate this. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 10 Mr. Bob Kelsey, 6340 Able Street N.E., stated that in 1962, the ordinance stated it was okay to have a trailer in the driveway if the neighbors did not have an objection. A couple of years ago he got a letter saying he could not park it in the driveway anymore. It is costing him about $400 per year to store his trailer and it would be nice if the dates were set up from April through September to park the trailer in the driveway as they had been doing for 36 years. He feels it is a discriminating situation when a motorhome can sit out there to the street but not his trailer. Mr. Reynolds stated that there could be a fourth option with the ordinance stating how many wheeled vehicles could be parked in the front driveway as opposed to what type. Councilmember Billings stated that the options should be kept open. staffs point of view is that they want to come up with an ordinance that does not require a lot of interpretation on the part of staff or property owners and is fair. That is Council's goal. Councilmember Wolfe stated that the staff is not doing anything wrong when they issue tickets. Mr. Larson stated that he has no complaints against City staff He appreciates this informative meeting. Mr. Herman stated that he hopes that everyone in attendance could receive a letter with everyone's points. Mayor Lund stated that the attendance sheet will be sent around with everyone's names and addresses. Councilmember Barnette stated that a family built a concrete slab off from their driveway for their motorhome and they were given a ticket. Fridley residents camp and fish and snowmobile, but his big hang-up was with the fishing boats that needed to be stored. That did not make sense. This is the best example of democracy for people to speak about their beliefs. He has heard tonight of the time limit for recreational equipment to be stored only in the winter and give time for the snowmobilers to store theirs in the summer. This may be the best way to do this. Promoting family activities is important, but he has heard from some people who are opposed because they say they want a nicer looking community. This is a public hearing. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it is an eyesore if a boat sets alongside a house for years on blocks or if a big RV is in the driveway. Sometimes the driveways are right next to each other or may be short. At what point does it become intrusive? One woman was concerned because she could not see down the street to drive out of her driveway because of an RV parked next to her. She is against these setting along the street due to a public safety issue. She has nothing against fishing boats but when is it too intrusive? We should look at the whole piece here. We are a suburban neighborhood and the majority of the cities around us allow this sort of thing. These vehicles do need to be parked on a hard surface. Ms. Elsie Hanscom, 6000 Stinson Boulevard, stated that she had an RV for many years. She .__. asked if front yard parking were allowed, would side and back yard parking also be allowed. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 11 Councilmember Barnette stated that was what they were here to discuss. Mayor Lund stated that they would take that into consideration. Ms. Hanscom stated that she would still want to park it in the side or back yard. Ms. Linda Nelson, 1357 64th Avenue N.E., stated that most of the RVs and trailers that are parked on the properties are nicer looking than four or five vehicles in some driveways that are just sitting there up on blocks with flat tires. RVs and boats cost quite a bit of money and people take pride in them and keep them up. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that there are some boats and other vehicles that are an eyesore that remain there for a long time. Mr. Sadowski stated that the nature of the driveway is relevant here. With his short driveway he would not park any of his five vehicles there. The ordinance should address the different kinds of driveways. Mr. Kelsey stated that these things are not pretty in their driveway. There just is not another place to put these things except for storage. Maybe we can go back to the 1962 ordinance and ask the neighbors if they have a problem with it. Councilmember Barnette stated that it used to be only on a complaint basis. Mayor Lund stated that three people have made comments that they are not in favor of parking in the front yard. One man realized it is intrusive to the neighbors and feels the answer is to store off site in a facility. The vast majority are in favor of some changes. In many cases it is intrusive and the side yards are too small and it is visual pollution. This all boils down to being neighborly but a few people make it bad for everyone else. How many objects should we allow for parking and what size restriction should we use. Most are open minded to changes but at what point do we decide what is or is not obtrusive. The most recent survey in 1999 alluded to the fact that most people were opposed to relaxing the restrictions. That question did say front yard or driveway. The Commission members were all polled and the majority wanted to keep the ordinance the same or more restrictive. He is willing to revise the ordinance to make it more workable and better for staff to enforce. 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 9:00 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated that staff would like to come back with a revised recommendation in the form of a text amendment and then would advertise for a public hearing. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 12 Mr. Burns stated that the question of being in favor of allowing non-motorized recreational vehicles in the driveway was included in the citizen survey. 11. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 213 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE ALLOWING BARBED WIRE FENCING IN CERTAIN ZONING DISTRICTS: MOTION by Councilmember Billings to open the public hearing and waive the reading. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 9:05 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated that staff is requesting consideration of a zoning text amendment to allow barbed wire fencing in certain zoning districts. The change would apply to Chapter 213 entitled "Fences." The use of barbed wire fencing has been prohibited since 1961. Contrary to code requirements, public utilities and businesses have been using barbed wire fencing as a means of storing outdoor items. Either the code would need to be modified or non-compliant fences would need to be removed. This should be reviewed for modern relevance. Certain public utilities and businesses have a legitimate safety concern. The use of barbed wire fencing would act as a means of protecting items stored outside of the zoning districts, which have been approved for outdoor storage. The use would protect the public from potential harm at cell towers, waterworks, and Fridley wells. Once the code enforcement begins, all aspects of the code need to be addressed. Public Safety Director Dave Sallman, stated that if the use of barbed wire was eliminated he would have safety concerns. The safety of cell towers, water reservoirs, water towers, storage areas, and private industry with certain storage needs would be a concern. Council expressed an interest in modifying this section in an earlier discussion regarding systematic code enforcement. Staff believes the change to Chapter 213 would allow barbed wire fencing in public utilities and zoning districts with approved outdoor areas would meet the City's requirements. Mr. Hickok stated that it is not intended to proliferate the use of barbed wire fencing but would allow existing facilities to maintain the barbed wire. An addition to the code would read: "An addition to an eight foot fence, up to three strands of barbed wire, which is not to exceed 18 inches in height, may be used on standard barbed wire arms designed specifically for that purpose. These barbed wire arms may be used to meet P, Public District, M-1,2,3, and 4, Industrial Districts, C-1 and C-3, Commercial Districts, under the following conditions: 1. Barbed wire be necessary to protect public utilities 2. Barbed wire may be used in the side or rear yard of those industries that have approved outdoor storage areas meeting all the code requirements. Otherwise barbed wire may be used in the side or rear yard of those commercial properties that have approved outdoor sales lots meeting all code requirements. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 13 Mr. Hickok stated that based on research, staffs recommended approval. A letter from United Defense asks Council to consider additional language that would state that barbed wire is necessary to protect public utilities and defense contractor facilities and that barbed wire may be used in the side or rear yard of those industries that have approved outdoor storage areas and on all sides of defense contractor facilities meeting all code requirements. The third suggestion is to state that during times of national emergency, defense contractors are authorized additional usage of barbed wire to include temporary barriers made from barbed wire and barbed wire on top of temporary fences. They are in strong support of the ordinance. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to receive the letter. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Lund asked who requested the change. Mr. Hickok stated that the Planning Commission was concerned about having fences shorter than eight feet in height which would bring barbed wire topping the fence down to a level where it could affect people. Mayor Lund asked if existing utilities would need to change their fencing because they are using barbed wire fencing without the eight foot requirement? Mr. Hickok stated that it would make it non-conforming but at such time that they made modifications to the fence, it would have to meet current standards. Mayor Lund asked if that would apply to when they add on to the facility. Mr. Hickok stated that any non-conforming site cannot be expanded. Mayor Lund asked how many facilities have barbed wire fencing at this time. Mr. Hickok stated that he believes it is over a dozen but less than a hundred. Mayor Lund stated that it stated that it would affect C-2 and C-3. He asked which ones would be allowable. Mr. Hickok stated that it is definitely the C-2 and C-3. C-1 is low intensity adjacent to neighborhoods. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the dozen or so businesses meet the public safety guidelines and fit the way it is written now. Mr. Hickok stated that generally they would. Big Value in the industrial district has been notified because the barbed wire is in the front yard. There is barbed wire around the outdoor FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 14 storage of Hilltop Trailer and it is on a standard eight foot fence. This is a good example of where it is permitted. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that surprises her because she thought the comment was that it was not allowed and we were looking at why it was there. Mr. Hickok stated that they could not explain that and have not had that discussion with Hilltop Trailer about that outdoor storage area. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they would have to remove it because it is non-conforming. Mr. Hickok stated that is correct. Mayor Lund asked if this would change it to being in conformance. the with Mr. Hickok stated that evenchange they would not. Mayor Lund asked why they would not be in conformance. Mr. Hickok stated that it was not approved as part of their outdoor storage facility to begin with. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that in no way are they advocating electric fences. Mr. Hickok stated that was correct. Mayor Lund asked if staff had problems with the additional language United Defense requested. Mr. Hickok stated they would support that. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what is considered a national emergency. Mr. Hickok stated that they do have national emergency language that says it is a presidential announcement of a national emergency and they would initiate certain actions with certain facilities. This is one of those certain facilities. Councilmember Billings asked if this would mean that an eight-foot fence would be the minimum height required. He asked what the maximum height of a fence was if there was no barbed wire allowed in a particular zoning district. Mr. Hickok stated that it is a minimum/maximum of eight feet. Councilmember Billings asked if this ordinance would be contradictory to anything else that says that a fence can be eight feet. Mr. Hickok stated that this is an additional provision to the eight feet allowance. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 15 Councilmember Billings stated that the barbed wire arms are those that are fixed at the top of the fence. With this language,we do not specifically say that they need to be on top of the fence and someone may have some barbed wire attachment device that would clip onto a standard pole at any height. Should we expressly indicate that it be fixed atop an eight foot fence. United Defense language could be switched from defense contractor to something more generic for other types of facilities that could possibly relocate to Fridley. FMC has barbed wire fencing on all sides of their property. He asked if there were any other businesses with barbed wire fencing in the front yard area. Public Works would be covered by public utilities that can have it all the way around. He asked if Hilltop Trailer sales be allowed to have barbed wire in their storage area. Mr. Hickok stated that staff would reconsider that storage area with the addition of barbed wire. It may not be an eight-foot fence and he has heard they have barbed wire surrounding the top of an enclosed area. Councilmember Billings stated that if someone has an approved outdoor storage area, as long as the barbed wire is on no more than 18 inches and is three strands and eight feet up, it would be in compliance without having to go through the special use permit process. Mr. Hickok stated that if it meets those criteria it is allowed. Councilmember Billings asked if the circular barbed wire along the top is allowed. Mr. Hickok stated that it would not be allowed. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 9:38 P.M. NEW BUSINESS: 12. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO REPEAL CHAPTER 113, ENTITLED "SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING COLLECTION" AND ADOPT A NEW CHAPTER 113: Ms. Jones, Environmental Planner, stated that one week ago during the public hearing on this item, several issues were raised. One concern was in regards to permissible time for construction roll-offs to be on site. The code as written in draft states a construction box would be allowed for a three-month time period in a twelve-month time period. This is referring to one container. If someone was constructing a replacement roofing job and had a bin in the driveway for one week and three months later decided to remodel their kitchen and placed another one for a couple of months, and later replaced a deck with another container, that would be permissible because none of those bins were there for more than a three- month period. Staff is trying to address situations where a garbage bin sits for months with no replacement occurring. This addresses FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 16 concerns about construction on business property because those bins are turning over and being _ replaced with new bins. Ms. Jones stated that curbside placement of refuse containers would be optional under the new code provisions. Someone may place the container at the curb if that is worked out among the owner and the hauler. The screening of bags of yard waste between collections is a concern for the handicapped. However, staff encourages Council not to create additional language, because this puts the City in a situation to determine what is a disability or not and enforce that. In most cases people can work that out with the hauler and neighbors. Staff expressed that they would be sensitive to holidays and placing garbage out at the curb on different days for six weeks per year. Ms. Jones stated that someone mulching leaves with their lawnmower and leaving it on the lawn is not composting. Staff has concerns about issues where people are raking leaves near a waterway or on to property not their own. In debatable situations we can address that with public education. Ms. Jones indicated that the container size issue should be an arrangement between the hauler and the customer. The City should not regulate that. The screening of garbage containers seems to be an area of concern but staff did not hear recommended language changes from Council. Council needs to make some policy decisions on this. The one language change that staff did make was something that was misworded in Paragraph 6 under the Licensing Requirements. Staff intended to say that a refuse hauler can only replace the refuse container to the private drive area of the property and not on the street for curbside pick-up. Staff had not made any other language changes from the public hearing last week. Councilmember Barnette stated that a family in the 6500 block of Monroe are next to some large containers that are not screened and they are concerned that the trucks would not be able to get in there to empty them if they were screened. Ms. Jones asked if the containers were at Hayes School? Councilmember Barnette stated that was correct. Ms. Jones stated that she has seen those and does not envision a problem with them getting collected. Councilmember Barnette stated that Ms. Sporre was concerned last week that she would be made out to be a criminal raking her yard waste onto her property. Can she continue to do that? Ms. Jones stated that she could not do that. Mayor Lund asked her if she was raking it off her property and did not get a clear answer. Councilmember Wolfe stated that it was still on her property. ___. Mayor Lund stated that we need to consider a size restriction on the containers for the haulers. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 17 Councilmember Bolkcom stated that a gentleman last week stated that there are 90 to 95 gallon containers. It is the Council's responsibility to be concerned about handicapped people. This would impact those people and she does not get a lot of phone calls about people complaining about bags. Is it composting if leaves are left on the garden over the winter? We are going to allow people to put the containers at the street. She asked if people who could not get their garbage can to the street would have to pay more. She also asked if rates would go up for individuals who did not want to use the bigger cans. The way the code is written, handicapped people that leave their bags down at the end of the driveway for a week would be in violation. We cannot count on neighbors to help them out or if they are gone on vacation for the hauler to pick them up. We are almost becoming control freaks on this stuff. Councilmember Barnette stated that he has not received a call in regards to garbage cans. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she heard complaints of garbage not in a garbage can or appliances setting next to a house for a while. Councilmember Wolfe stated that he has never had a call on garbage cans but he has had calls that people are upset about the changes. We may have gone too far. Councilmember Billings stated that Chapter 113.08 has been discussed. A period should be put after "collecting construction waste for more than three consecutive months." We do not need the "during any twelve-month period" phrase, which is confusing. We could use language similar to Chapter 113.03 to say construction waste must be collected a minimum of every 90 days or whatever. We need to write something that is clear and concise. Chapter 113.10, Composting, states that composting is any above-ground compost piles. If a person digs a pit to do composting, does this section apply? Ms. Jones stated that there may be another section of code that would prohibit that. Councilmember Billings stated that if there is, we need something clear and concise. In Chapter 113.09, we do not define co-composting. Ms. Jones stated that was copied from the State Statutes and she will check on that. Councilmember Billings stated that Section 113.06 was clarified with returning the containers to the driveways. That whole section could be more clear. In 113.03, trash must be collected once per week but does this mean that the same collector has to collect from all property in the City? The sentence structure may cause confusion. In 113.07, Container Screening, there are several areas throughout the ordinance we refer to "view from the public right-of-way" and need to look at whether we need to pop in the language "public park or residential area." Section 113.06 could say that we could get by with a one week time period due to the elderly who cannot haul the yard bags from the back to the curb. Section 113.05 refers to establishments that generate more than 1 cubic yard of waste per week. Chapter 113.04 refers to dwelling units up to four. He indicated that he does not fall into any of these and could have any kind of solid waste FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 18 container he wanted to under code. Commercial solid waste containers do not have a tight fitting _ lid and that is not possible with the dumpsters. Mr. Burns, City Manager, asked if we could preclude haulers for charging more for collection at the garage as opposed to the curb. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that the City has the authority to allow certain restrictions. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that if we change the code affecting a group of people that are borderline with income or handicapped is her issue. The haulers can now get by with one person and we might have to pay more. Mr. Burns asked if she was more interested in asking the haulers that question rather than see us change the ordinance to allow for that provision. Ms. Jones stated that she polled the haulers about that and they currently do offer cart service in other communities. They stated that it is an option but most stated they do not charge more but some stated it depends on the circumstances. Haulers do charge more for service at the door. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that is hard to believe. If we go to all the cans at the street, it may be cheaper for all of us. Ms. Jones stated that this is a very competitive industry. — Councilmember Bolkcom stated that we would put a different burden on people who cannot put it at the street . She asked if every garbage can at every public park need to be screened from view. Ms. Jones stated that the code states that all properties must be screened. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that individual garbage cans at parks are not screened. Ms. Jones stated that we are talking about containers, not individual cans. We need to look at the purpose. It would not be practical to screen cans at a park so people could see them to deter littering. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that there are probably more overflowing garbage cans in parks than there are at homes. We are becoming too micromanaging. Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that there were 110 outdoor storage violations or complaints in 1998 in the area north of 79th west East River Road. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that this would have a huge impact on people in the community. Council decided not to take on cans being screened from view and once we go through this code how are we going to enforce it? Systematic code will impact many people. ___. • FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 19 Mr. Hickok stated that Council needs to tell Staff what the word and enforcement mechanism should be in the future. It is important that if this is an ordinance the words should be on paper and the City is adopting it and needs to enforce it. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that this started out as garbage can size wanting to be changed and now we are talking about a lot of other things that are of huge impact. Mr. Hickok stated that container size was the tip of the iceberg for a section of the code that was outdated. It was contrary to state law and did not have current language. There are three steps that staff is proposing for this process. One step is to repeal the existing code and adopt a new Chapter 113 with the changes proposed. Council will also need to adopt the resolution setting the recycling fees. There are five parts to Chapter 113. One part is the definition section related to solid waste. The next sections are related to composting, recycling requirements and licensing requirements. The main changes to the code involve the definition sections changed to match State Statutes and added definitions staff felt were missing. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she believes that we should look at the whole thing. It seems that they have gone a little overboard. Councilmember Billings stated that there needs to be a sense of uniformity. Mr. Gary Marten, 6141 Sixth Street, stated that it seems that he does not see trash cans at the curbs. His hauler comes up the driveway from behind the screened area and he does not have to look at garbage cans for hours once a week. Friends in Coon Rapids have to haul that large cart out and everyone looks at them for a full day. If there are haulers on different days we would look at trash cans every day of the week. We are headed in the direction of saying we will have trash cans out at the end of our driveways for an extended period of time. He would rather look at an RV. The haulers may say that they are not willing to come up to his yard to take his trash. We really only have multiple bags of trash in the spring or the fall and almost all of us rake our yards within the same two week period. We are kind of overreacting. He is opposed to trash cans at the end of the driveway and is for putting the bags out at the end. Many people in this community have limited demand or need for trash haulers if they are single. He appreciates the job all of the City does. Mayor Lund stated that he has struggled with the bags and raking and there could be some exception there. Maybe there can be a time frame that allows for leaf pick-up. Councilmember Billings stated that if they start doing that there are many situations where the dates are not possible for everyone like if the leaves on your trees fall early. Mr. Hickok stated that the first step could be to take out how long the leaf bags could be out. The suggestion of a week when each person's window would take away the enforcement ability. Mayor Lund stated that we could table this to another time to review all these issues. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 20 Councilmember Billings stated that Chapter 13.06, has two sentences with the first stating that they can be out there until the next available collection, but not more than five months. They cannot even be in the backyard screened for more than five months. The 28-hour period is also in question and maybe that could be restructured. We need to have something to state that people do not have bags in their yard until April 1. We are not writing our ordinances for good rational neighbors, only the exceptions. There are haulers directed at picking up containers at the curb and haulers who drive into the driveway to pick it up at the door and he has mixed emotions on that. He is not sure if we should delve into the relationship there with the hauler in terms of pricing. Mayor Lund stated that trash may be down at the driveway every day of the week and is for removal of restriction of the size of container. One thought is to have one hauler that picks up on the same day of every week like Columbia Heights. Councilmember Wolfe stated that there are three different haulers on his street, yet the garbage cans all go on the same day. Councilmember Barnette stated that there is an advantage to having multiple haulers as far as the rates are concerned. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to table this item to a date of staff's choice. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that there was some consensus that the leaf bags not being screened was not an issue. That could probably be rewritten so that bags of leaves in gardens would be all right. Ms. Jones asked if Councilmember Bolkcom wanted to know what the haulers' reaction would be if they were allowed to do curbside pick-up. Would they switch to that service or offer both? Councilmember Bolkcom stated that was correct. She wanted to know how this would impact an occupant who was not physically able to bring the garbage can to the street. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she was impressed by the flags flying and patriotic signs and it shows that people are coming together. Councilmember Billings stated that last week a resident that was at the meeting, and he wanted to know the status of the property on Hugo and East River Road that is County-owned. Mr. Burns stated that Jon Olson at the County has pledged to do something. They will either turn it over to ACAP as a rental unit and they would maintain it, or they would take it down. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 17,2001 PAGE 21 Mayor Lund stated that we received a letter of support from our sister city in Fourmies, France. Our problems are very small in comparison to what happened on September 11. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE SEPTEMBER 17,2001, CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, itittlf4411-0L Signe L. Johnson Scott Lund Recording Secretary Mayor