Loading...
03/10/1975 - 5451� L] � � � PATRICIA RANSTROM SECRETARY TO THE CITY COUNCIl. � P[�BLIC HEARING MEETING � MARCH 10, 1975 J � � �� � [� I 1� � � � � � � ' � ' � � 13 THE MINUTES Of THE PUBLIC HEARING MEETING Of THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF MARCH 10, 1975 The Public Hearing Meeting of the Fridley City Council of March 10, 1975 was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Mayor Nee. PLEDGE OF ALLE6IANCE: Mayor Nee welcomed those present at the meeting and invited them to join the Council in saying the Pledge of Ailegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT MEM6ERS ABSEP�T Councilman Starwalt, Counciiman Fitzpatrick, Mayor Nee and Councilwoman Kukowski. Councilman Breider. Mayor �Jee said Councilman Breider had asked that the people be notified that he was away on a business trip and there would be no aciion taken concerning the matters in the First Ward until he is back. Ne said the hearing on the improvement projects • would be held tnat evening, but the Counci would not act on the Res�lution to adopt the assessment rolls. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: tlayor Nee indfcate�+ that Councilman Fitzpatrick would like to add an item concerning the appointment of a representative to the Bikeway/l,'alkway Committee from the 7hird Ward. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to adopt the agenda as amended with the appointment to the Bikeway/Walkway Committee. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS: C HEARING ON FINAL PLAT P. S. #75-01, CENTRAL VIEW MANOR 2ND ADDITION. BY � Mayor Nee explained the item which was to be discussed at the hearing. The Public Works Director said both of the hearings could be taken care of at once , since they concerned the same proposal. Ne mentioned one to be a request for a replat and the other to be a request for rezoninq of the same area. The Public Works Director explained the proposed replat and said the administration had advised that the property be replatted rather than split. He also mentioned if the lot were split, it would ' create a legal c�escription in meets and bounds which would be lengthy. He said the rezoning request is from C-2S to M-1 and this action would aliow Lot 2 to be all of the ' same type of zoning. He referred to the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of January 22, 1975, and said the Commission had recommended approval with three stipulations. Mr. Sobiech read the suggested stipulations. Mr. Sobiech said with � the first stipulationlisted in the minutes there should be a correction made to Lot 3 in the first stipulation. He mentioned the third stipulation necessary in the case that the property across the back lots may change hands in the future and there would be a need for the 30 foot easement to provide a driveway and sewer and water. �- � � �� '� 7he Public Works Director also pointed out that the rezoning recommendation for approval was subject to the approval of the special use permit. He said this would be brought to the Council some time in the future. ,The Public Works Director indicated that the petitioner was willing to cooperate with the erosion control measures pointed out by the Rice Creek Watershed District for control of poilutants. He said there wili be a sedamentation basin installed and the petitioner is aware of this and is willing to comply with the stiFulation. The Petitioner addressed the Council and indicated there will be some rearranging of fil] in the area with the construction. Councilman Starwalt asked if the creek is defined in the area. The Petitioner pointed out that it is not, there is just low land in this area. Councilman Starwalt said he felt the proposal would be an advantage to the whole area and would enhance the area. He said he thought this would make worthless land usable. !4 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCN 10, 1975 - . � _ _ _ � PAGE 2 Mayor Nee asked the petitioner if there would be dismantling outside the fenced area. The Petitioner said there would not be. Mayor Nee asked if some agreement had been reached for the set back of the fence and the Public Works Director said not at the present time, they were current]y working on such an agreement. He indicated that this woul� be contingent on what would happen to the property to the East and how it is developed. He indicated the fences would have to line up. Mayor Nee asked if the planting strip had been taken care of and the Public Works Director said there had been an agreement reached on this aspect. Mr. Sobiech said the petitioner agrees in principle. Mayor Nee aksed if there was any comments from the audience or Council. Councilman Starwalt mentioned he felt the applicant had been working with the City and he felt this would be a 9ood proposal if there is no oil allowed to go into the Creek. The Petitioner said this is also one of his concerns and there was no prob- lem in the stipulation for the proper measures to prevent this. The City Manager said within the special use pern t, a number of stipulations could be placed on the permit. He said this would enform the applicant of what the City expects in the line of landscaping and aesthetic treatment. He said the areas where the property would be improved could be listed. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to close the Public Hearing on the proposed plat. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Public Hearing closed at 8:03. MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to close the Public Hearing on the rezoning request. Seconded by Councilman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hea��ing closed at 8:04 P.M. PUSLIC HEARING OP� REZONING REQUEST ZOA #74-05, BY RAO MANUfACTURING COMPAPIY TO REZONE FROM C-2S TO M-1; THE SAME BEING 200 MISSISSIPPI STREET N. E.: The Public Works Director said the rezoning would provide the entire parcel with the same zoning. Mr. Sobiech placed the plan for the parcel on the easel. He said the applicant is requesting to rezone 275 feet of the property from C-2S to M-1 to correspond with the property to the west of it. He said the building was praposed to be constructed in the center of the parcel. He mentioned as proposed, the building would require a variance in the set back from 100 feet to 70 feet on the portion of the property to the south where the parcel abuts residential zoning. The Public Works Director said P1r. Olson was present at the meetina to answer any of the Council's questions. Mayor Nee advised Mr. Oison that the Ward Councilman was not present at the meeting. Mayor Nee explained that he had talked to Counci,lman Breider concerning the proposal and he is in agreement with it. Councilman Starwalt asked the applicant if the underpass construction would hem in the development of the property. The Petitioner replied that they were aware of the construction of the underpass before the purchase of the property, and the .property suits their purposes with the construction of the underpass. Councilman Starwalt asked if there were any further questions concerning the noise of the type of manufacturing. The Public Works Director said he felt this to be all settled. He mentioned that ihere had been some question at the Planning Commission level on the subject. The Public bJorks Director explained thatthe building would be constructed so that the manufacturing area is in the center of the building and the permiter of the building would be storage. He said this will allo��� for a buffer for the noise. Mayor Nee asked how much investment would be involved on the parcel, and how many people would be employed. The applicant answered that presently their operation employees approzimately 40 people and had employed up to 50 last year when 6usiness was better. He explained the total investment would be approximately $700,000 with the building � to be in the area of $250,000. He explained the other costs would be fo.r landscaping and rough grading. He r�en�t�oned that there would be extensive excavating work. Mayor Nee asked Councilman Fitzpatrick if he had any questions concerning the proposal. Councilman Fitzpatrick said he was on the Planning Commission when the item had been �,�,. discussed by them. He said he had no questions. � . • 15 � PUBLIG HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 3 1 The applicant explained the manufacturing pla�t would do sheet metal stamping, deep die sheet metal stamping, assembly, tool and die vaork, and engineering that would relate tothe stamping projects. u ' Questions concerning the noise levels were raised by residents of the area. The � applicant said he would like to control the noise ir:side the building and this tivould control the noise on the outside of the building. He also pointed out that it wouid be possible to take some measures beneath the equipment in the soil. He mentioned that this had been done at their current site and had worked to eliminate the vibrations and noise. � � � , � � � 1 � ' ' ' � Mayor Nee said he hoped the peop]e would keep in mind that this location is right next to the railroad tracks. The City Manager said there had been quite a bit of discussion on the noise and vibration matter at the Planning Commission level. He felt this to be an impor*ant factor in this proposal. The City Manager said the applicant had agreed to meet the standards set out by the City. Ne said if there would be any vibrations or noise that go beyond the property, there would have to be the proper measures taken to allev- iate this problem. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to close the Public Hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all votin9 aye, Mayor �lee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Public hearing closed at 8:19 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT RCLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ST. 1974-1: Mayor fdee explained that the assessment roll prepared is being proposed by the administration andthe method of assessment had been established by a policy of the City and had been followed for mary m�ny years. he explz.i�ed the �arpose of the Public Hearing is to hear the people's comments, advise them on t"e proj2ct and receive their comments on whether the assessment is fair and provide self satisfaction to the people in the assessment area. ' Mayor Nee said some of the improvements had been petitioned for, some had been determined necessary by the Council and some recommended by the Administration. Mayor Nee recalled that there had been a preliminary hear�ng where estimates of the costs of the project were given. He said at that time the Council had determine� that the project was necessary through d�scussion with the people and tFe City had prcceeded to corstruct the improvement. Maycr Nee said at the present tine, the exact prices of the projects are known. May�or PJee said the Council �r�ould like to hear all of the ramarks on the projeci:s. Mayor Nee informed the people of the area that the First Ward Councilman, Councilman Breider, was out of town on a business trip, but he would listen to the tape of the meeting. Mayor `!ee asked iF all who u�ished to comment would state their name and address for the benefit of the secretary. The Public lvorks Direcl:or indicated that the preliminary estimate provided at the improvement hearing were in most cases slightiv lower or about.the same as the final assessment figure. Mr. Sobiech continued to explain that the bituminus costs had tripled and ihis had caused an increase in some cases. He expiained tha.t the City plans for a 10% to 15% increase Hiith type of inflation, but this had exceeded this figure. Mr. Sot,iech informed the Council that the contract cost was $147,214 with the 310 tons of bituminus mix. The Public Works Director said the cost had risen from $36 to $92 a ton and this was a determining facter in �rrivirg at tite increased contract price. He continued to state that in the past the increase had been from 8% to 1�J% and this would have made the project from SlII,C00 to $20,0^0 less costly. SQUIRE DRIVE, DANA COURT, CAMELOT LANE, AND ARTI-;UR STREET: The Public t�lorks Director explained that the estimated price for this area had been $11.87 per front foot and the final assessment would be $i1.C5 per foot. , Mayor Nee pointed out that the area being discussed was on the map on the screen. � He asked if there ��ere any comments from the people of tne area. Mr. David Harris said he would like to make some comments on the pi°oject, but would rather�wait until the remainder of the project is discussed. The Public Works Director said the curbing had not been installed on the west side of Arthur Street. He indicated this to be a designated State Aid Road and would be II� �� completed to these standards in the future. He said the assessments in this area would be $6.05 per foot. • 16 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 4 Mr. Dave Harris asked if the assessment of the ar2a, $11.05, was complete when there had only been one mat installed. The Public Works Director said the final mat would be picked up by State Aid funds. Mr. Harris asked if this would be done at the time that the other curbing is installed on the west side of Arthur Street. The Public works Director agreed with this cominent. Mr. Harris asked if there would be a charge to the property owner at this time and Mr. Sobiech said there would be no charge later. Councilman Starwalt asked if the people residing on the west side of Arthur Street would be assessed for this in the future. The Public Works Director indicated the people on the west side would be assessed a normal residential price at that time. He indicated there may be an increase due to inflation. 73'2 AVENUE: The Public Works Director pointed out that this was a commercial or industrial standard street and the estimated price had been $13.04 versus the final assessment price of $14.02. Mayor Nee asked if anyone present had any questions and th?re was no response. BACON DRIUE: The Public Works Director explained that the road was 31 feet, with face to face concrete curb and gutter the black topped. He_indicated the final assessment to be $15.63 versus the estimated price of �17.24 per foot. He explained the street had been constructed from a rough graded area and there was extensive grading and cleaning and grubbing. He said the easements were not as extensive as had been originally thought and this was less expensive than the estimated price. Mayor Nee asked if there was ar,yone present who wished to comment concerning the Bacon Drive improveinent and there was no response. Councilman Starwalt indicated that this had been a difficult Street to work with, but there was no adverse comments at the present time. Councilman Starwalt said the people of the area worked very closely with the City. Mr. Dennis Czecj, 1395 Onandaga, Lot 8, asked what his assessment u�as at this time and the Finance Director said it would be $228. Mr. Czech asked how the assessments are figured o:�Onandaga and the�Finance Director said this had been done by follc��irtg the method that has been City policy for 15 years. Mr. Czech said he could not see where the construction of Bacon Drive had enhanced his property. The Finance Director said everyone in the City would 5e paying a side yard assessment unless they live in a very unusual area. Mayor Nee corrnnented that the City had established this policy to get the side streei;.s developed. He further explained if the corner lot had to pay the entire cost these people would say they don't want side streets. Mayor Kee said this type of palicy is a fairly typical means of sharinq the cost of the side street development. He also mentioned if this was not done, there would be a question of whether the side streets are of value to anyone in the City. Mayor Nee said there is always a problem of people trying to deterinine the ownership of the streets in front of a home. Mayor Pdee said the City really does need the side streets and if there is an objection to the assessment, the property owner would have no recourse but to make a formal objection at the present time and provicle the court with this claim. Mayor Nee called on the City Attorney to explain this procedure The City Attorney explained that anyone who is assessed has the right to appeal this if they feel the amount of the assessment is greater than the benefit to the property. - He advised those present that this would have to be done at Anoka County,and within 20 days after the passage of the Resolution a,dopting the final assessment'roll. The city Attorney further advised the people that this must be done in writting and filed with the Court. He said the procedure indicated within the discussion would only �be very general and would not be adequate information for filing such a claim. He said if it is not submitted properly, the claim would be lost. Mr. Czech asked when this 20 day time limit would begin. The City Attorney said this would be 20 days after the Council adopted the final assessment roll by resolution. He said he did not think this would be at the present meeting, bu't may be the following Monday evening. � I� J � � ' � [� � � � � � �i ;1 � 17 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 5 Mr. Raymond Buechele, 1425 Onandaga, asked the amount of his assessment and the Finance Director said this would be $242.25 for the 85 foot lot. Mayor Nee asked if anyone else wished to comment on 6acor�Drive and there was no response. SUNRISE DRIVE A(�D RAIfdBOW DRIVE: The Public Works Director said the final assessment rate would be �8.49 versus the estimated cost of �7.94 per foot. He said the assessment was for the construction of a 36 foot black top roadway with concrete curb and gutter, back to back. Mayor Nee asked if there were any comments and there was no response. 5TH STREET: ' The Pub7ic Works Direci;or informed the Council that the final assessment would be $15.40 per foot versus the estimated cost of $15.60. He indicated that this construction was sorrewhat more because of the formirg of the existing land to the proper grade. He said the construction consisted of concrete curb and gutter and a 36 foot black top street. Mayor Nee asked if there was anyone present from this area and thEre was no responsa. Mayor Nee asked if there was anyone present from the Wall Corporation and there was no response. 68TH AVENUE AND 7TN STREET (67iH AVETIUE TO 6uThl P,VEf!!JE): The Public t�'orks Director explained that the final assessment a�ould be $1Z 91 per foot and the estimated cost had been $11.29. The improvement cor,sists of concrete curb and gutter with a 36 foot black top street. He said the cost had been increased because of the cost of the biiuminus mix and �lso because of the amount of grading that had to take place to obtain the proper drainage. He said the grade called for extensive restorative work in this area. A resident of the area questioned the use of the yellow marking on the map on the screen and its meaning. The City Manager explained that this was the p�oposed alternate assessment for the side yard a�ssessmeni. He continued to explain that at the public hearing on the improvement it had been questioned whether the people residing on the northwest of Rice Creek Terrace use 7th Street and 68th Street for access to this area. He said it had been questioned if they shouid share the cost ot the improvement because of this. He explained that the basic policy of the City in the past has been to only assess the one side of the street for side yard assessments. He said it would be the Council's prerogative to assess on the north side of the Rice Creek Terrace if they feei the people are benefited. He explained that two assessment rolls had been prepared because the Council had directed the Administration to prepare the alt�rnate roll at the time the improvement was ordered. He said the probiem arose because the people on the ncrth side would not be assessed for the side yard because of the location of the alley. He indicated that they would not be paying any side yard assessment in the area under the present policy. He again stated that the Council would have to decide if it would be justifiable to assess both sides. He said in the past, the City had not assessed both sides. v Mr. John Fink, 465 Rice Creek Terrace, addressed the Council and said what had been done by the'�ouncil for 15 years would not be �one if the alternate roll is adopted. Mr. Fink explained that his wife had come to City Nail io check on the assessment and had been advised that the assessment would only be spread one half the tivay ' ' down the block. Mr. Fink mentioned the fact that if there was a change in policy dnd there was anything done to the other streets in the area, they could be assessed again. Mr. Fink said he thought the alternate roll would be inequitable. Ne thought . this would allow for the potential of being assessed in the future. � . Mr. Paul Dannenberg, 3i5 Rice Creek Terrace said he opposed the assessment as indicated in the alternate roll. Mr. Dannenberg continued to comment that he had lived in the area since 1960 and had had to go out and find ti�ihere 68th Street was. He also informed the Council that he uses the Red Owl Parking lot for access. He � said the Police and Fire Department cannot use 68th Street for access to the area. He also mentfoned that when 4th was improved, the assessment was not spread up the street. Mr. Dannenberg said lie strongly protested the alternate roll. � Mr. Quentine Freeburg, 301 Rice Creek Terrace, said he would like to reiterate the 1� PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 1C, 1975 PAGE 6 previous statement by indicating that a precedent v+ould be set by the adoption of the alternate roll if the people all the way do4�n the street on Rice Creek Terrace would be assessed. He said he felt this would be an inequitable assessment for this area. Mr. Larry J�dsaas, 347 Rice Creek Terrace, said he also felt this would be inequitable. Councilman Fitzpatrick said he felt there were two problems with the alternate roll, whether it should be on both sides of the street and whether it should go all the way down the block. He indicated that he thought that the alternate roll was to be prepared to only one half of the �aay. Mayor Nee asked why the alternate roll was prepared to go this far. Mr. Mervin Herrmann, Assessor, said the people of the area had been notified because of the possibility that the Council may want to adopt the roll to be extended this far. He indicated that if this would be adopted, the legal requirements of the notice would be fulfilled. Mayor Nee questioned the amount of the assessment if the side yard assessment were stopped at the point where the red had been indicated on the rap for the other assess- ment roll. Councilman Starwalt asked if the alternate roll is not used, the property owners abutting the yellow mark would not be assessed. He asked if the original roll • would be adopted, would the assessment amo�rt be $2.36 per foot and if the alternate roll adopted, the assessment would be $1.30 per foot. The Assessor said this was correct. Mr. Herrmann continued to comment that this would be the amount if the assessment were carried all the way to University, but if it was cut off at some oi-.her point> this amount would change. MCKINLEY STREET: The Public Works Director indicated that the final assessment cost would be $14.80 as compared to the esti�mated price of $15.63. He said this would be a 36 foot black top street with concrete curb and gutter. Mr. Sobiech said the storm sewer had been installed in conjunction with the street improvement project. Mayor Nee asked if there were any comments concerninq this area. Counci.lman Starwalt said he is always curious whether the people of the area are satisfied with the street. He mentioned the hardships that are brought to the people during the construction period and questioned why no comments are made by the people concerning the quality of the construction. Mrs. Janet Rudnitski, 658 77th Avenue N. E., questioned if the final assessment would be $14.80. She further cor;nented that she thought this was a beautiful street and she sure likes the street light in back. She thanked the members of t�e Council. 78TH FlVENUE: The Public Works Director said the final assessment would be $40.68 versus the estimated cost of $48.05. He said it should be pointed out that this is a commercial or industrial black top road and is 40 feet wide with concrete curb and gutter. Mayor Nee asked if there was anyone present from this area and there was no response. Councilman Starwalt questioned why the industrial area had the higher price. The Public Works Director indicated that an additional reason for this assessment being so high weuld be that a very small area could be assessed for the improvement. He commented only 350 feet was assessable. Councilman Starwalt commented that an extensive project in a small area is very costly. The City Mana�er indicated that the standardsand specifications on this type of road- way would be much higher contributing to the increase in cost also. Ne added, the roadway would have to bear heavy truck traffic. ' ALLEY (BETWEEN MAIfJ AND ELM STREETS): The Public Works Director commented that the cost of the assessment in this area would be $6.88 compared to the estimated price of $4.81. He pointed out that there had been some problems with the property abutting the improvement and a retaining wall had to be installed to save the house. He said with the addition of the attempt to save some trees along with the concern for the house, this assessment cost ran up some. Mr. Richard Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace, (Lots 21, 22, and 23) admonished the administration for placing the curb cut in the wrong place. He said this had to !� be removed with .a: new one added. He questioned who would pay the cost for this error. Mr. Harris asked if the assessment of $6.�8 covered the cost of the retaining wall and the Public Works Director said yes. ■ !9 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 7 Mr. Harris continued to comment that he thought there was very poor communication with the engineering department also very poor planning. He said he would like to know who had authorized the construction of the retaining wall. H� asked if this had been mentioned in the plans at the time of the preliminary hearing. Mayor Nee asked if the wall had been a part of the original proceedings on this improvement and the Pubiic 4(orks Director said yes. Mr. Harris said he had asked the contractor of th� retainirig wa11 how much he was being paid for the construction and he recalled he had been told the cost was in the area of �6,800. He asked the Public Works Director if he had the figures on this construction. Mr. Harris stated that the fill had not been taken out by the contractor, the abutting proper�y o���n°rs had to do this. Mayor Nee aske� Mr. Harris if he was suggesting that,tNie cost of the wall be removed from the assessment. Mr. Harris answered that he v.rou7d feel beter about this if it were. Mr. Harris coirmented that if the Administration thought that this is something that i�ad to be done, the people should have been notified. He said there are only six to eight property ovm�rs on the block. The Public Works Director indicated he had the final figures on the cost of the retaininr wall. Ne mentioned the wall is 751 square feet for a cost of �2,631.30. The Public works Director pointed out that the wall construction was necessary because of the existing house. He said in order to save the house, the wall had to be constructed from four to five feet from the structure. i•�ycr Nee referred to the co�nents concerning the trees being hauled away and asked if the Public Works Director if I�e had knowledge of this. P1ayor iJee asked if the contractor had not dene his job. The Public Works �irector said t"e contractor was trying to complete the portion of the projec� in the cencer of the City wit"in the residential areas first. He said it was going to be done, but this area k�as to be left until the other area was completed. He further commented that PACO was anxious to do some work and had taken the trees out. Mr. Sobiech said if the fill would have been removed by the contractor, this would have showed up in the price of the project. Mayor hee asked the City Attorney to cor�iment on the current lee,islation that would allow the perscns in the a�ea over 65 tc defer the assessment. Ma�or Pdee said this would be an aid to the persons in the Ci�y �vho would have a difficult time meeting the cost of the assessment. The Ci�y Attorr,e,� advised theCouncil thut at the iast session of the Legislature, they ha.d approved the dEferment of the assessments for persens over 65 who have an economic hardship. He added, it dealt witl� storm sewer projects, bu4 the ��ording is such that it appears all special assessments could be defered. The City Attorney said he was not aware of an opinion from the Attorney General on this, but sir,ce it had been adopted, it would be possible for oersons over 55 to make applicatioii for this type of deferment through the Anoka County officials. He said the application cou'G be provided to the City Counci] and the interest car, be set with the assessments and this could be defered untilthe person over 65 no longer r2sides at the location of the homestead. Ne added, when the person dies or moves frcm the property, 1:he assess- ment plus the interest would become due. He said he did not know if the County had the necessary bianks for this procedure at the present time because the newness of the program. . Mayor Nee said if aryone in the neighborhood knows of such a burden on persons over ' 65, they should instruct them to contact City Hall for the details on this type of deferment. D9ayor Nee said he would not want the Council to take ac�ion on the assess- ment roll tf;at would put the senior citizens out of their homes. � t �_� � Mayor Nee asked if there w�re any more comments on the project.' Mr. Darrel Wolf, 6446 ,4rthur Street, asked wh� Arthur Street had not been completed at this time. The Public Works Director explair,ed that originall,y, th2 area was to have an underground storm sewer which would drain into Rice Creek. He said this piping would have been along Arthur Street. Mr. Sobiech continued to expiain that with the development in tha area and the creation of the outfall and the initiation of Project #114, certain piping and ponding was constructed east of Arthur Street. The Public Works Director mentioned that with discussions with the Rice Creek Water- shed District, it had been determined that their rules and regulations will no longer allow direct outfall into Rice Creek. With these regulations, it would not be possible to construct the piping to the Creek on Arthur Street. Mr. Sobiech said the City had to prepare an alternate plan with the drainage into Moore �ake. �� zu PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 8 Mr. Sobiech said this was the creation of the piping.and ponding ditch system to moore Lake. He mentioned there will be additional construction on ±he project and at that time, the final improvements will be made on Arthur Street. Mayor Nee asked how long this would be. The Public Works Director said the City is discussing the piping ponding system. Mayor Nee asked if this may be in the next year. The Public Works Director said this could be next year. Counsilman Starwalt questioned mentioning it may be the following year and said it could also take from three to five years. The Public Works Director said he could not say, but would like this system completed as soon as possible. H�nentioned this would keep the cost dosvn. The City Manager pointed out on the map that there is the possibility of the installation of another roadway in the area. He atso mentioned being this is a State Aid road, the only cost that would be assessed to theproperty owners would be the curbing, all other costs wauld be picked up by State�Aid funds. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to close the Public Hearing. Seconded by Couniclman Starwalt. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Public Hearing closed at 9:04 P.P1. PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET ���1PROVEMENT PROJECT ST. 1974-2: AND RECEIVING COMMUNICATION IN OPPOSITION FROM HAROLD L. SULLIVAN AND GEORGE MEISSNER: MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to receive the communications from Mr. Harold L. Sullivan and Mr. George Meissner opposing the assessment roll. Seconded by Council- woman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 7TN STREET: MISSISSIPPI STREET TO 67TH AVENUE: The Public Works Director advised the Council that this was a State Aid Street and the assessments would only be the normal reside�ti�l rate. He indicated that this amount is determined by the average cost of ihe projects within the past year and the rate had been calculated at �12.91 per front foot. In the commercial areas, the assessment would cover the construction costs at a figure of $28.12. He mentioned that the commercial areas do not have the State Aid rate. Mr. Jim Thayer, 377 66th Avenue, addressed the Council and questioned why a portion of the road had been constructed to the 50 foot width. The Public Works Director said this would a11ow for some modification in the future. Mr. Thayer mentioned when the street is plowed, the snow hits one man's house. Mr. Thayer said no one knew the street was going to be this wide. Mr. Thayer said abviously, this was not in the original plan. He mentioned that the markers had been placed at the narrower point and moved later. We said he thought this had been an after thought and a poor one. Mr. Thayer asked whai his assessments for the project would be and the Finance Director said �18°.00. The Finance Director said the cost would be greater if the roll would be figured with less footage. Mayor Nee asked if this portion of the added width of the roadway was in the plan when it was approved by the Council. The City Manager said this was a State Aid road and this had been planned because of the traffic load. He said the additional width will alleviate the problems of traffic at the intersection. He mentioi�?d the City did have the right of way and the dimensions were needed. He said after the creation of the wider roadway, there is still eight feet of boulevard in this area and the normal boulevard is seven feet. He mentioned that the snow may be pushed into private property, but his is done all over. Mr. Rodney Middlestadt, 495 66th Avenue, asked why the corner lots are assessed at a higher rate. He asked if the State is funding the project, why are the assessments over $12.00 per foot. Mayor Nee explained that on the State Aid roads the assessment is figured by computing the average cost of the �,�sessments of the year. He explained that the corner lot is only assessed for 1/3 of tre footage with the other 2/3's being spread down the street. Mr. Herrmann, Assessor, said the actual cost of the project is $28.12 per foot. ' Mr. George Meissner, 373 Mississippi St. N. E., addressed the Council and indicated he had Written the letter that had been received by the Council earlier in the meeting. He said he was not able to attend the initial hearing, but he said the City � i ' � � i� PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 ' PAGE 9 had indicated that he would not be included in the assessment roll. Mr. Meissner referred to the minutes of the meeting at the hear•ing and quoted a remark from the minutes made by former Mayor Liebl indicating the City's policy was to spread the assessment one half tha way down the street and that this policy would not be waived. Mr, Meissner referred to the benefit of the improvement and said it would only increase the traffic of the area if anythina. He believed this additional traffic flow to be detrimental to his property. He mentioned he had talked to a realtor concerning this aspeci and he affirmed his view. Mayor Nee said the resolution to adopt the assessment roll would not be acted on at the current meeting. He said this would allow for the people of the area to converse with Councilman Breider. Mrs. Marion hlous, 370 66th Avenue asked if 5th from 66th to 67th had been assessed. ^1�yor Nee said this had been done by the Nighway Department. He again mentioned that Councilman Breider felt that these people would never be getting the side yard assessment. Mr. Donaid Hinz, 372 66th Avenue, indicated that he had been under the same impression ' expressed by Mr. Thayer. Mr. Hinz said he was beyond the half way mark on the street and he was under the impression that the assessm2nt .ould only be spread one haif way. L _J � ' CI' 1 � ' t , LI. Mr. Roger Harmon, 388 66th Avenue, asked if the point of consideration of equal benefit had been reviewed. He said he would favor the payment by all those under the yellow marking being assessed, He thought all benefiting should be included in the assessment Ms. Margaret Johnson, 374 66th Avenue, said she favored the assessments going one half the way on tte west side. Mr. Dale h4aus, 490 67th Avenue, said there are many people that benefit from the construction of the street. He indicated •all use the street for access into this area. He mentioned that the construction had been very well done. He said that ihere is some problems with the snow up in the yards. He said there is a 1ot of benefit from the street and more than what is being assessed. He said he felt that everyone in the area uses the streets and he thought this would be a reasonable assessment for th�people that do use the access. Mayor Nee asked if anyone else wished to comment on this portion of the project. There was no response. 79TH AVENUE (APPROXIMA?ELY 140 FEET WEST OF BEECH STREET TO QURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILWAY RIGHT/OF/WAY : The Public Works Director said the final assessment in this area would be �31.88 per foot. Mayor Nee asked if anyone was present to make comments on this area and there was no response. Mayor Nee questioned the members of the Council on their views concerning the closing of the hearing. He thought, possibily, this discussion should be kept open, but questioned if all those wishing to comment had done so. Councilman Starwalt said he felt if there may be problems, the hearing should remain open. Councile�ornan Kukowski said she felt it would be better if the hearing was left open. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to continued the Public Hearing on St. 1974-2. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, a71 voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the- motion carried unanimously and the Public Hearing was continued at 9:35 P.M. PUE3LIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ST. 1974-4: MISSISSIPPI STREET: CENTRAL AVENUE TO STINSON QOULEVARD: � The Public Works Director pointed out that the estimate at the preliminary hearing had , been $14.41 per foot and through negotiations with Anoka County, it resulte� in the County taking over Mississippi on this project as a County road. He indicated the total cost of the project to be $147,032.50 with the County picking up $114,923.55. He explained that this would result in a final assessment of $3.77 for the curb area and $5.53 for the areas with sidewalk. He indicated that the sidewalk was only � being assessed to the property owners on the north side of the street. The Public Works Director explained that it is the policy that when the County improves a street R ; 'LG PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 that only the curb and sidewalk are assessed to the property ovaners picks up the cost of the street improvement. Mayor Nee asked if there was anyone present who had any questions. PAGE 10 The County Mr. Arlon Haupert, 65Z4 Anoka Street, addressed the Council and said he did not object to the construction of the sidewalk in the area. He indicated with the improvement of the �reet, there is a need for the sidewalk because of the amount of traffic and its speed in the area. He mentioned the people would have to be off of street. Mr. Haupert further commented that the people orithe south side of the street are receiving the most benefit of anyone in the area. f�'r. Haupert said he felt the property owners on the nor•th side of the street had been treated un�aii°ly. He mentioned tha� with the construction of the sidewalk, there is no off street parking available to those abutting Mississippi Street. He felt this created a hardship for the property owners to the north. He indicated he did not feel that there is one property owner that was benefiting from the improvement, and quite the opposite, the improvement would decrease the value of their property. Mr. Haupei°t mentioned that there is a problem in the access of the alley. He pointed out that when the sid�walk is p'owed, it closes off the alley access. He asked if there could be some type of policy on the plowing of the sidewalks. He said the plb'w that is being used by the City just pushes the snow ahead of it until the plow comes to an apening such as an alley or driveway and it fills up the opening. Mr. Haupert read from a copy of the Fridley Sun indicating the construction of the sidevaalk would not be assessed to the property owners. Mr. Haupert said he did not belive the safety factor was rel�vant as a benefit to the people being assessed for the sidewalk. He said the sidewalk is very necessary, but his opposition was that why was he being assessed for the sidewalk when ther e is no benefit. The City P1anager explained that the people of the aera had not been assessed for the construction of the sti°eet as had been done in other areas. He reiterated the policy on the construction of streets that are under the County direction. He pointed out that the people were only being assessed for the sidewalk and on ly one half of the cost of the curbing. He said the traffic in the area necessitated the construction of the side- walk. He mentioned with the cooperation of the County, it had beenpossible for this area to be designated a County Street from Central to Stinson Boulevard and resulted in an assessment for the people in the ar�na of �,5.53 for sidewalks, $3.77 for curb, rather than $14.00 per foot. He said this is less than one half of the cost the people living on the other streets in Fridley are paying. Mayor Nee commented that the people would be paying $5.00 for the sidewalk and would be given a road free. Mr. Haupert said he felt this to be an inconsistancy. He mentioned that the City had notified the people that this would be a Stzte Aid Roadway and they had changed the plan and made this an uncomparable alternative. Mayor Nee pointed out that the comparable thing would be an assessment for $12.00. Mayor Nee said at the previous notice to the people in this area, it had been indicated that the sidewalks would not be assessed. Mr. Nick Garaffa, 6750 P1onroe, indicated that the forr�er P�ayor Liebl had indicated to the peopie that this would be a State Aid Road and the sidewalk would not be assessed to the people of the area. The City Manager indicated that when this statement had been made, the road ��✓as State Aid at the time. He said it is the City policy to assess the normal residential rate for State Aid roads and ^ot assess the sidewalks. He mentioned this would be $14.41 versus the proposed assessment of $5.53. The City Manager said it would be possible to put any title on the proposed assessment, but this is a very reduced cost to the people of the area. Mr. Haupert questioned if the people of the area should have been notified when there was a change from the State Aid Street to the County Road. The City Manager pointed out that the people h�d been told that their assessment would be �14.41 and now it would only be $5.53 for sideevalks and $3.77 for curb. Mr. Haupert said it had been changed to a County Road. The City Manager indicated that the County status allowed for the reduction of the assessments to the peopie in the area. He said whether the improvement would be State or County, the improvement specifications had not been changed. He said the only change would be that the road was not being assessed to the property owners. Mr. Thomas Haaen, 1479 i�1ississippi Street, said he felt there should be another Public Hearing, the plans had been changed. lie mentioned the people of the area had been told that they were to get the sidewalk free. He mentioned that the people of �.� the area were agreeable to receive the sidewalk free, but they were not willing to pay for it. � � � I ' PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 11 Mr. Naupert said he thought this should have been explained to the people. He said before the project was started, this should have been explained to the people who live in the area. The City Attorney advised the Council that he did not feel it was necessary to notify the people if the assessment were to be a lesser amount. He indicated that the plans for ihe improvement had not changed since the tim2 of the original improvement hearing. He said he did not think there would be any legal problem in this action of the Council. The City Attorney said he feit that it was a substantial benefit to the people of the aera that this be developed as a County Road. The City Attorney said he was not persuaded by the statements made. Mr. Alvin Flanders, 6501 Anoka Street> indicated he had lost three feet of his � property and had been compensated �l for this by the City. Mayor Nee asked if this was the usual practice of the City. Mr. Flanders indicated that he agreed to this acquistion at the �time of the request by the City. 1 The Public Works Director explained that the City had to acquire the right of way from five pe^�le in the area on the north side of the street. He said the City staff had apNroached the people and they agreed to the acquisition of the easemen-t. The Public Works Director indicated that the sidewalk was constructed on this easement. � � Mr. Janiak, 1479 Mississippi Street, questioned in other areas there is a stamp placed in the sidewalk indicating the contractor of the project. He asked why this was not done in this case. The City Manager said the City retains all the information on the contract and contractor within its.files. The City Manager explained if the peopie had any problems they should call City Hall. hir. Roger Gleason, 6535 Arthur Street, said he is ��ot opposed ta the sidewalk. Ne voiced the objection�o the fact that the City does not plow the alley. He also � voiced concern because the peopie of the area had to sho��el the alley and the County comes along and plows it closed when plowing the streets and also that the sidewalk _ snow plow closes the a11ey. He asked if there may be scmethin9 that could be done � about this. hlr. Gleason also indicated that access to P1ississippi Street is v2ry � dangerous. He said he had called City Hall many times and had been told that th2re is nothing that could be done about this. He questioned why they keep being plowed back in. • � Councilman Starwalt said he had been in the area, he was aware of t he problems and could nat promise any relief. Councilman Starwalt said perhaps if there is better equipment, a better job could be done. He mentioned that the a112y situation is a ' different matter than the topic of the hearing, the street and sidewalk. � � 1. � � � Mayor Nee informed the residents that if they petition for the improvement, the alley can be paved. Mr. Gleason said not all of the people use the alley. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor ;�ee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Public Hearing closed at 10:17 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 0�! FINAL ASSESSP1ENT ROLL FOR SEWER, WATER AND STORM SEWEP. IMPROVEMENT PROJECT P10. 114.: WATER AND SEWER LATERALS AND SERVICES ON MCKINLEY STREET: - The Public 4Jorks Director listed the�rices for the improvement as follows: front foot assessment rate for water later 1 is $11.05 per foot, the front foot assessment , rate for sewer lateral is $9.99 per foot, water service at $2i?..05 per service and ; sewer services at $289.12 per service. The Public Works Director said the estimate at the preliminary hearing had been �13.27 for the sewer and water lateral had been $13.27. Mayor Nee asked if there were any questions or comments from the audience and there was no comments. ' `L3 i"�` 'L4 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 12 WATER AND SEWER LATERALS AND SERVICES IN THE NARRIS LAKE ESTATES ADDITION AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES: The Public Works Director listed the assessments in this area to be as follows: front foot assessment rate for water lateral is $9.55 per foot, the front foot assessment for sewer lateral is $9.59 per foot, water service at $200.69 �er service and sewer services for $299.17 per service. He mentioned the estimates for this area had been $9.54 for the water, $9.50 for the sewer, $200 for the �•�ater services and $300 for the sewer services. Mr. Dave Harris said he would make some comments after the presentation of the remainder of the area. STORM SEI�'ER (AREA BOUNDED BY 66TN AVENUE ON THE NORTH 61ST AVENUE ON jHE SOUTH, ARTHUR STREET AND KERRY LAP!E ON THE l�!EST, AND STINSON BOULEVARD OPJ THE EAST: He listed the prices for the four different areas as: $1.12 for Area A, $2.73 for Area B and Area C, and $6.49 for area E. Mr.'Dennis Schneider, 6190 Stinson Boulevard, addressed the Council and indicated that he did not believe the lake had been created for the benefit of the entire drea. He said he believed the storm sewer only benefited the people who live on the lake and the developer. Mr. Schneider indicated he believed the City may have proceeded i1legally in going ahead with this project. Mr. Schneider continued his presentation by referring to State Laws 105.37 Subdivision 6 and questioned by this section if the project had been created to be beneficial to the public. He also read item C, Subdivision 7, and Se:ction 105.38, Section l. Mr. Schneider next referred to Section 105.42 and questioned if the City was acting lawfully in the area of public water. He mentioned it would be unlawful to make a change in any dam, reservation or any public waters. He indicated this would include filling an excavation. He said this cannot be done without written permission of the Commissioner or someone authorized by him. Mr. Schneider referred the Council's atten- tion to the map on the screen and indicated that by this inap and also the map in the Department of Natural Resources, the swamp had definite boundaries. Mr. Schneider indicated that after 90% of the work had been done in this area, the City obtained a permit. Mr. Schneider feit this made it impossible to determine the amount of work done in the public waters. Mr. Schneider mentioned that the City Attorney had expressed the feeling that this was not public waters. He questioned if the City Flttorney was qualified to make this judgement. Mr. Schneider mentioned that a permit should have been obtained immediately from the Rice Creek 44atershed district and also the Department of Natural Resources. Mr. Schneider said the permit was abtained by the City on November 7, 1973, the same day it was requested. Mr. Schneider placed a graph of the areas and amount of total cost on the screen. Ne continued to cominent concerning these figures and summari�ed his remarks by saying 35 people in'the area do not feel that they benefit from the dredging or the �ditch from Harris Lake to Moore Lake. He indicated that those people feel they may benefit from the construction of a storin sewer in the area, but not for the construction of the pond. Mr. Schneider said the people of Flreas A, 6, and C do not feel they benefit from the construction of the pond and that these assessments shauld be placed on the plat. Mr. Schneider said he had a meeting of those people of the area in his home and they had indicated to him that they would take legal steps if the Council does r,ot reconsider. Mr. Schneider said this had not been his intention, but this is the feeling he is getting from the people of the area. Mr. Schneider said this would be the secondstep in the development of the storm sewer in this area, there would be another step which would bring everyone's assess- ments to $8.00 per 100 square feet. He indicated l� would like to have the administration further review the a.ssessment rolls and come back with a different roll. The City Manager pointed out that the City had studied alternatives to the current construction which would mean an expensive construction for this area with an out- fall to Rice Creek which would eventually end up in the Mississippi River. The City Manager referred to the storm sewer district map of the entire City and indicated that there had been a change in the boundaries for this area. He said the City had three alternatives the first being the expensive syste.r�, the second discontinuing the development in this area and thirdly, the construction of the storm sewer on a piece meal basis. He referred to the construction within the ariardale area and said this had come under Project #106. He said under this current construction, there was ' � � ' 1 25 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 13 a need to get the water from the Narris pond to Moore Lake or Rice Creek. The City Manager said at the time of the Council's consideration of the alternatives, the Council decided that the piece meal ty of construction would be better. He indicated under this plan land had to be a,uired for the pond, the piping and the ditch to Moore Lake. The City Manager said all of the areas indicated in the assessment roll contribute to this water and outfall and should pay for the outfall because they do benefit. Mayor Nee asked the City Attorney if he felt the City should have purchased the land and ditch. The City Attorney said he relt the question to be more of an engineering question than a legal question. He mentioned he had originally worked on the writting of Section 105 as quoted by Mr. Schneider. The City Attorney continued to comment that the Section is quite new and has never been tested. The City Attorney mentioned the City would have to acquire the ponding area if the storm drainage were directed to this area. He stated it is unlawful for the City � to deposit storm drainagz on private property. P�r. Herrick said he had worked for five years in the Department of Natural Resources and had helped draft Section 105 in the late 50's. The City Attorney further pointed out that no oermi'� had been originally obiained through the Departmen± of Natural Resources, b�t a Nermit had been obtained from the Rice Creek Watershed District, and the Rice Creek blatershed District is responsible for transmitting a copy of th e plans to the Department of Natural Resources upon receipt of them. Ne continued to explain that if the Department of Natural Resources had any objection, it would be up to them to voice those objections. He said no objection was voiced by the Rice Creek Watershed District. The City Aitorney said he had submitted a]etter to the Department of Natura7 Resources stating the City was requesting a permit. He said the copy of the plans had been in the office of the Department of Natural Resources for a long time and ii was not a question of whether or not they should approve them. He said at this time the permit was issued by the DNR. He again mentioned that the City could not deposit storm water on private property. He said the property would have io be condemned before the water cou]d be deposited there. ' The City Attorney said the cost of the property, ditch and outfaits is a legitimate concern. Ne said whether the area could be used as it originally was for the deposit of th��storm water would be more of an engineering �vestion than a legal one. hle said in his opinion, he felt it necessary to acquire the property and to improve the area with the outfall to take the water to the area where it could eventually be disposed of. Mr. Schneider said he had talked to the Attorney Genei�al's office and there was some quesiion in Section 105 relating to wheth2r or not the property was a marsh. He said if the property is considered a bog or a marsh it would be prohibited to build within its bounds. The City Attorney said he had talked to an attorney in the Department of Natural Resources office and questioned if there had been any change in the law concerning the depositing of storm water on pi°ivate property and he had indicated there would be change in the existing law. Mayor Nee said the law is what the court says it is. Mayor Nee continued to comment that the question may be whether the 1973 1aw is constitutional. He said as it had been read, the logic is strong. He asked what would be an efficient means of arriving at this determination. The City Attorney stated, whether the law is constitutional or not is not the question. He added, assuming the law is constitutional, it is said that Municipalities cannot deposit water on private property. Ne said the declared judgement is positive in this type of question. The City Attorney further commented that there has to be a controversial situation before the matter could go to the courts. Fie said the Council would have the alter- native to go to the general fund. He mentioned that this alternative would be legaliy available. Whether or not it would be economica]ly sound and feasible, it would have to be considered if this would be a viable question. He also mentioned that it would be possible for the City to test this situation legaTTy. Mr. Robert Kirwan, 6578 McKinley, questioned if the map on the screen was the same plan that was presented at the time of the consideration of the plat. Mr. Kirwan said he believed the assessment to be unfair and asked that the burden be placed where it belonged. He said the water had been running into this area before the development �. �h PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 14 of the pond. He said he would pay his share for where the water was running, but objected to paying for the construction of thepond. He added that the pond is now barren ground with no trees or shrubs. He mentioned that the land had soaked up the water like a sponge. He asked why the land had to be sculptured to the extent it was. Mr. Nicholas Mavrogenis, 6170 Briardale Court, questioned the water level of the marsh. He asked if the marsh was self sustaining. He also asked what happened to the run off of the area in a rain. The Public Works Director explained that the water would stand in the area in the damp weather. He said the current system was installed to handle the 50 year storm. He said if there is two feet of overflow, this would be directed into Moore Lake. Mrs. Gene Gasparr�, 1604 Briardale Road, asked if this would be a final assessment for this area for storm sewer. The Public Works Director pointed out that this would be the final assessment for Projeci No. 114. Mrs. Gasparro said as she understood the matter, there could be additional assess- ments for storm sevrer in the future. The Public 4lorks Director said t.he maximum assessment for this area would be $8 per 100 square feet. Mrs. Gasparro asked why the people in this area are getting hit for assessments ali of the time. The Public Works Director indicated that the area west of this is within the same drainage district and there would be additional work done when this area is developed. Mrs. Gasparro asked if this was a permanent system. She indicated that she did not want to throw her money out the window on something that is not so good. Mrs. Gasparro said she would like a statement for the amount of the assessment before she would pay the assessments. She indicated that the people had not received any notification on the amount that was due at the present time if the assessment were not placed on the tax rolls. Mrs. Gasparro said she did not lil:e to be told to hire an attorney to file an objection. Mayor Nee indicated the City was not trying to tell the people what they have to do, the City P,ttorney had indicated th�t th�s wculd be the most efficient p;^ocedure for filing such an objection with assurance that it would be in an acceptable form. Councilman Starwalt asked if it would be possible for the City to send statements. Mr. arunsell, Finance Director, explained the �rocedure for payinent of the assessments in full at this time or 30 days past the date of the adoption of the assessment roll. He said normally a statement is not sent out. He indicated that very few people choose to pay the assessment at this time. The Finance Director said the staff would send statements to those people who wanted this done. Mr. Haupert asked the staff if the people of the area would stand to be assessed up to $8 per 100 square feet and the Public Works Director said yes. Mr. Haupert continued to comment that he resented paying the same amount for this assessment as the people living on the lake, He questioned if the benefit would be equal. Mr. Dave Harris, 470 Rice Creek Boulevard, said he had spent the best part of the past two days studying the rolls that the staff had prepared. He said he had the opportunity to acquire the ansaaers ta the administrative questions. He said he was concerned about the policy decision in the roll. He men� oriP_� there are a couple of sides to every situation. Mr. Harris continued to comment that he had tried to cooperate with the City in every respect. He said if the City had asked him to do something he would do it and this had amounted to additional expense. He listed several of the areas where he had changed his plans for the development to correspond to the City's requests. He mentioned he had dedicated easements and obtained thein for the City. Mr. Harris refei�red to the comments made concerning t�e ecology of the area and said he had removed 55 tons of garbage. Mr. Harris also referred to the taxes obtained by the City for this property prior to the development and said this was 5550 per year. He said at the current mill rate he would be paying $1,500 on the same area. Fle also mentioned this would be a great deal more after the complete development of the area. Mr. Harris said if there is a change in policy there would have to be justification for the change. He said all of the surrounding property owners contribute to the drainage of the area and they should all be assessed equally. Fle questioned the Council on why the assessments within the plat are higher on the roll. The Public Works Director said that this project did not cover the entire drainage district. He again pointed out that the total drainage plan of the district is to be done on a piece meal basis. He reiterated that it was hoped that no one in the � a � i ' � PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 district would be assessed more than $8 per 100 square feet. PA6E 15 27 Mr. Harris said he was paying an unfair share to begin with and he objected to this. � ; He pointed out that at the time the property was platted, the Council and staff had indicated that he would be required to pay the escrow of $800 per building site at the ' time the building permit is acquired from the City. He said now, the assessment roll indicates a payment of $70,000 to be assessed on the property. Ne said with the current � pian, the sewer would be in and assessed before the homes are built on the lots. He mentioned that there would be no way to revive this kind of funds from the sale of the property. Mr, harris sa.id the assessment would have to be based on the cost and spread equally throughout the entire district. Ne said on some of the larger lots in the � area the assessm�nt would run as high as �4,700. He said aside from the Innsbruck area, this would be the highest assessed area in the City. D?r. Narris indicated he felt that a storm sewer assessment 9n excess of $4,000 per lot was very steep. He mentioned that he had paid a considerable amount of maney on the lot5 at the time • he had purchased them. � � Mayor Nee asked Mr. Harris if he objected to the payment of the assessments under the project on the ro11 rather than by means of the �800 per 1ot beina paid at the time the bui•lding permit is taken out. P1r. Harris said this was true, but he also objected to th2 �rea he was responsibie for (Area E) as having the highest assessment rate in the distr�ct. He said he thought he N�as paying more than his share. Ne asked wh,y the assessment for Area E was the highest. � �layor �fee said he thought that tliis may be because the people in Briardale had already been assessed for Project No. 106. He said the current assessment is noi an indication of their total storm se��rer rate. The Public 4lorks Director informed �he Council that the . lots in Sriardale ha� paid $5 per 100 square feet at the time of Project Plo. 106. He said witi� the current assessment proposed for this area, the total assessment to this � point o-rould be *7.08. Mr. Harris pointed out the differerces in the prices for the construction in the area and asked why his assessments would be representative of 60% of the contract. He felt $8,000 should be reapplied to the area. � Mr. Harris i7Gicate� that by awarding the project to the low bidder, the cost of the construction of the project had been increased. The Public Works Director pointed out that sometimes this type of trouble is caused by the requirement of the City to award the project to the low bidder. He said the total price of the project cannot he limited to the actual construction�cost, the meeting time of the staff, legal fees � and interest rates would also have to be added to;the construction price. He indicated that the Council was also aware of the fact that;there had been some problems with this contract. � � .1 f The City Manager asked how many people were present at the meetinq from the Briardale area and those present indicated this. The City Manager referred to the previous discussion and said some points had already been made concerning the City's policy and the plan for the development of the storm sewer in this area. He said in the past, all property owners within one drainage disirict had been assessed at the same rate. He said this was the case when a storm seti�rer projQCt was constructed within the whole area and ttie wnole a.rea would be assessed at the same time. He then summarized the history of the area. A resident of the Briardale area cornmented that P4r. t�iller had made the home buyers in t'rre area sign a waiver ��h9ch �,�ould net a71ow them to claim the escrow monies. The City Manager questioned this statement saying the money had been escrowed by the builder to the City to be transferred from the escrow accout at the time of the storm sewer project in this area. He said the City would have control of this money and it would be forwarded for payment on the assessments Tor �his storm sewer project. The resident said Mr. P�filler had indicated that this escrow money would not be used for the assess- ment and had told the people they would have to pay the assessment. The City Manager said the City did have a copy of the original agreement. , 7he City Attorney saicl he had not seen the waiver signed by the people. He indicated if the money had been paid by t'r. Miller for escrow on the storm sewer, it cannoi be given back to him, it would be applied to the assessments for storm sewer. He said if the City has a valid claim for this assessment, the City may claim this against the storm sewer escrow amount. Mr. Steve Nuspl, 16n0 Briardale, addressed the Councii and said if he had money in escrow there wou]d be no problem, but he had attended the meeting as a matter of II � principle. Ne said one point he would like to address is that this proiect changed a marsh '� into a lake and the other point he objecied to was that part of the money for the project I was being used for the costs for dredoing the lake. The Public Works Director said the � - - 28 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 16 material was rearranged and deposited. Mr. Nuspl continued to comment that the people of the area are not benefiting from the dredging and asked why they should pay for this. The Public Works Director said the developer is paying for the dredging. He said the people in the other areas wou1d be paying for the ditching down stream. The Public Works Director explained with the construction of the system the ditch had to be redefined. The City Manager informed the people that the Briardale area had been mined before its development and consisted of a gr•eat deal of low area. He pointed out that before the development of the area the water was held within the propercy's confines. After development, the water was forced to travel north. He said they had run into some problems with this preposal and had realized that if the property was developed that the drainage problems within the whole area would get worse. 14r. Nuspl said he objected to the changing of tlie marsh into a lake and also to the work done on the ditch. Mr. Nick Garaffa, 6750 Monroe Street, addressed the Council and said he lived on Anoka Street at the time of the construction of the project. He referred to the filling of �Ghe Harris Lake Estates property and r.ecalled that sand had been hauled in from Surlington Northern, the ,p soil from the construction of Mississippi Street was placed in ti�is area and also the material taken from the lake was used for fill. He asked what the depth of the lake is. TYie Public ldorks Director said this would range from three to four feet. Mr. Garaffa said he had been told that the lake would be six feet deep. He said when this item was at the Planning Commission level it had been mentioned that if the lake was not of a proper depth the fertilizers would go into Moore Lake and this situation would become worse and worse. The Public 4Jorks Director explained that the type of system with the ditching and ponding would be adequate protection from this type of situation. Mr. Garaffa indicated at this current depth, the puf�lic lake would be ice all the N�ay to the bottom and would never support fish life. He questioned if the people would be getting their money's worth. The Public Works Director indicated the pond was never intended to be a lake, it is to be a retention pond. Mr. Harris said he was concerned about two things and he had tried to follaw the logic of the City M�;nager, but felt the policy had been changed in this case. He asked if this area could be assessed in i�he same manner as it had been donein the past. He mentioned that the pond had been created on�behalf of the City for retention of storm water. He said he was certain that the pond would store a larger quanLity of water. He did not feel the assessment is as equitable as it might have been. Mr. Ken Moxness, 1604 66th Avenue N. E., addressed the Council and urged the Council to �llow the people of the area to pay their fair share of the assessments, not pay for some land developers portion. Mr. Curtis Johnson addressed the Council and said he lived in Innsbruck and was present to represent Mr. Larry Morford, 6235 Kerri Lane. He said when P1r. Morford had purchased the property he had been told that the assessments had been paid. He said there had been a previous storm sewer assessment and this would be the second assessment. Mayor Nee asked if Mr. Morford would have any money in escrow to cover this assessment and Mr. Johnson said he did not t'?ink that there VJdS an escrow account at that time. The Public Works Director said the previous assessment may have been in the amount of $500 for Project No. 106. .. Mr. Carl Garaffa, 6750 Monroe Street, questioned if there was any possible process to stop the pond from reverting back into a marsh. Mayor Nee said he did not think so. He said the City was having the same problem in Locke Lake. , Mr. Dennis Schneider indicated that the problems in the area would not be solved by the escrow amounts. He indicated that there were many people present outside the Briardale area. • The City Attorney indicated that any agreement between the purchaser of the lots and - the bui�lder would be their ov�n. He said the escrow agreement had been established to benefit the peopie buying the lots. He indicated that it was the City's wish that the people not be assessed in the future for any assessments. He said if the people did not have an attorney present at the clos<ng to represent them, this waiver may have been obtained. . Mayor Nee said this situation should be double checked. He said he did not see how the �\ builder could waive this requirement. He said the onl,v way that this money could be taken from the escrow account is through a legal claim. � � � � i � , i � � � � � � � �y PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 � PAGE 17 The City Manager reiterated that the City has the money in their account and they would use the money for the assessment of the storm sewer unless someone provides a legal document which would stop this use. Mayor Nee questioned the people present if their concern was whether or not the receiving body needed to be bought and whether or not there was a need to improve the outfall. He also questioned P�r. Harris if his concern was whether or not the assessment spread was equitable. He mentioned that there had also been a question raised at whether the marsh would have been adequate without the creation of the 1ake. He said Mr. Harris had also questioned if this would be an equitable expense in the drainage district. The City Attorney said he felt very strongly about this and in his mind there was little question. He said this would be proven by 12 to 15 cases in the Minnesota Supreme Court which had made decisions on cases on this subject. He said it would be up to the citizens if they would like to take the time and money to protest. Mayor Nee said he wou2d like the City Attorney to put this type of fact in writing and have it available for the Council at their next meeting. Playor Nee said if there is a question on this roll, the hearing could be kept open another week for review. He said this would allow those interested to talk tc the staff. Mr. Harris said ihe hearing could be closed and those interested could come back the next week. He said he felt with the central depository the policy had been to equalize the assessments. He questioned the current proposal to separate districts from the larger districts. He said he did not thir�k this was a fair proposal to isolate a portion of the drainage district. STORP9 SEWER (AREA BOUNDED QY 8]ST AVENUE ON THE NORTFI, OSQORNE ROAD ON THE SOUTH, MAIN STREET ON THE WEST, AND UNIVERSITY AVENUE ON THE EAST : The Public 4lorks Director explained that the storm sewer main interceptor area is $3.10 per 100 square feet and the rate for the �torm sewer lateral is $3.37 per 100 square feet. Fie said the totai cost for this area would be $6.47 per ]00 square feet. Mr. Richard Harris, 6200 Riverview 7errace, addressed the Council and indicated he thought the City had improved the materia] used in the interceptor. Mr. Harris asked who had paid for the replacement of the 12 inch water main on University Service Drive. The Public Works Director said hewas not sure but he b2lieved this would have been the contractor. He added, the contractor would definitely be responsible for this replacement. MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to cTose the Public Hearing. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, P�ayor Nee declared ihe motion carried unanimously and Pubiic Hearing closed at 12:47 A.M. OLD BUSINESS: REGEIVING REPORT REGARDING ZONING OF FRONTIER CLUB, 7365 CENTRAL AVENUE N. E. RICHARD d. POVLITZKE : MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to receive the report regarding zoning of the Frontier Club, 7365 Central Avenue N. E. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney advised the Counci7 that Mr, Smith and Mr. Povlitzke would appear before the Council the following week for discussion on the problems relating to this matter. NEW BUSINESS: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR ST. 1974-1 STREET IMPROUEMENT PROJEC7: MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to table the considertion of the Resolution confirming assessment for ST. 1974-1 until the next meeting of the Council. Seconded by Counci]- woman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. • CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLU7ION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR ST. 1974-2 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to table the consideration of the Resolution confirming � � � , �l �� ;�o PUBLIC HEARTNG �1EETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 18 assessment for ST. 1974-2 until the next meeting of the Council. Seconded by Council- woman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote> all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR ST. 1974-4 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT: MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to table the consideration of the resolution confirming assessment for St. 1974-4 Street Improvement Project. Seconded by Councilwoman Kuko�•�ski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor P�ee declared the motion carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR SEWER, WATER AND STORM SEblER TMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 114: MOTION by Councilman Starlealt to tabie the consideration of the resolution confirining assessment for Sewer, ldater and Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 114. Seconded by Councili,�oman Kukowski. Upon a yoice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION N0. 40-1975 - APPROVING A^�D AUTNORIZItVG �.IGHING TNE AGREEMENT ESTABLISHI�lG WORKING COfdDITIONS tdAGES AND HOURS OF Eh1PL0YEE5 OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY FIRE DEPARTf�M1ENT F(1R TNF VFAR 1Q7F• Mayor Nee called on the Finance Director to explain the terms af the contract. The Finance Director said the 1975 contract would call for a 10% increase for the fire fighters and captain and also for payment by the City for $15.00 of their dependent health insurance. He said there were on ly two changes irr the contract. Mayor Nee asked how many men this wou1d cover and the Finance Director said three. Ma,yor Nee asked the Finance Director if he would recommend that the Council approve the agreement. Mr. Brunsell said yes. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to ado�t Resolution No. 40-1975, approving and author- izing signing the agreeinent establishing working conditions, wages and hours of the City of Fridley Fire Department for the year 1475. Seconded by Council�^�oman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. APPOINTP1ENT TO BIKEWAY/WALKWAY COMMITTEE FROM WARD THREE: MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to appoint Mr. Jerome Krist, 148 P,iversedge Way, as the Thii°d Ward representative on the Citizen Eike�•�ay/Wa]kway Committee. Seconded by Counci1woman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. COt�iMUN I CAT I OiJ S: HAROLD QELGUM, CHAIRI4AN, HUMAN RELATIONS CGMMITTEE: TNCREASING MEMBERSHIP: Mr. Harold Belgum, Chairman of tne Human Relations Committee, addressed the Council and indicated that with the current status of the Commi±tee, it is difficult to meet a quorum requirement at the meetings. He suggested that some of the minority or ethnic groups inthe communii:y be represented on the committee for the purpose of some type of festival of nations at the bicentennial. He said he would not want•the membership of the committee limited to Fridley citizens, he felt there may be an advantage to having membership from Anoka County and establishing a community committee. Mr. Belgum said he had talked to various people wFio had expressed a willness to participate in this type of committee. He said he would like the membership increased to 30 people wwith a quorum changed from eight to ten. MOTION by Councilman Starwalt to direct the Administration to research the proposal made by Mr. Qelgum Chairman of the Human Relations Committee and re�,ort back to the Council at their regular meeting with a recor��menclation. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Playor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. EST FOR CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSFlL FOR ASSESSMEPJT OF PROJECT N0. 114 BY MR. DAVE Mr. liarris addressed the Council and indicated he would not 6e able to attend the following week's Council meeting and he would like to make some suggestions to the Council on alternatives for the assessment of Project PJo. 114. , ,. i � � � � � � � PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MARCH 10, 1975 PAGE 19 — � -- ;� �� ,a _ � Mr. Harris suggested that an assessment of $6.00 per 100 square feet be used as a basis for the assessment of the entire drainage district. He also mentioned that within the drainage district, in other areas than the one being assessed at the present time, there had been money escrowed for the storm sewer. He suggested that this escrow account money be put into this project. He said the other area should be assessed the same rate for the entire project. Mayor Nee asked if Mr. Harris' basic question was that he was being assessed at the present time and the original thought on this storm sewer charge is that the money would be escrowed by the builder at the time the lot is sold and fihe building permit obtained. Mr. Harris explained that this would be his main objection at this time. REQUEST FOR DIRECTION FR0��1 COUNCIL CONCERNING THE DUTIES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION BY RICHARD HARRIS, CHAIRMAN: Mr. Richard Harris, Planning Commission Chairman, addressed the Council and requested some direction from them on the types of matters that the Planning Commission should handle. He mentioned that it would be possible for the Pianning Commission to do some work revising the Bill Board regulations within the City. He said the Planning Commission was currently working on the zoning ordinance. Mayor Nee mentioned the Planning Commission should get together and list their priorities and perhaps the Council could meet with the Commission some time in April. He suggested that this be done at one of the study sessions or conference meetings of the Council. ADJO'JRNMENT: MO7ION by Councilwoman Kukowski to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and ihe Public Nearing meeting of the Fridley City Council of March 10, 1975 adjourned at 1:35 A.M. �Res ectfully submiti:ed, i� �C�,,.�.L�_.�.-...-� , Pat Ranstrom Secretary to the City Council Date Approved William J. Nee Mayor a � ', 1 ' � � � Following are the "ACTIONS TAKEN". Please have your answers back in the City ' Manager's Office by Wednesday Noon, March 19, 1975. Thank you. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL - PUBLIC NEARING MEETING - MARCH 10, 1975 - 7:30 P,f�l, PLE�GE OF ALLEGIA`VCE: ROLL CaLL: A�OPT IO�� OF AGEfJDA : 7:30 P.I�1. Given Counci7man Breider Added: consideration of appointment to Bi;.eway/Walkway Committee PU�LIC NEARINGS: PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL PLAT P.S� #75—�1, CENTRAL VIEW i�iANOR Zt�D ADDITION, BY REALCO, INC. �W. GUSTAVE DOTY), BEING A REPLAT OF PARCEL �%gO, SEC� 1Z. GENERALLY LOCATED �ETWEEN CENTRAL AVENUE AND HIGHWAY #65, NORTH OF �3� 1�VENUE I�i . E � � � � . . � . . � � � � � . � . � � . ! �to objections voiced. Pub]ic Hearing closed. � % G�VEERING ACTION NEEDED: Put on next agenda � + � �.� � ' PUBLIC iiEARING ON REZONING �EQUEST ZOA #75—�1, BY CENTRAL AUTO PARTS, TO REZONE FROM C—ZS TO M-1; � GENERALLY LOCATED �UST yORTH OF 1201 73� AVENUE .N� GINEERING � � N,E,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, No objections. Public Hearing closed. ACTIQN NEEDED: Put on next agenda . , 1-1F 2-2A � 1 � i �GINEERING � ' ' .e � � NANCE PU�LIC NEARI(�G MEETING, (�ARCH 10, 1975 PUBLIC HEARIi�GS tCOi�TINUE�) PAGE 2 pUBLIC iiEARING ON REZONING REQUEST ZOA #74—�5, BY RAO I'�IANUFACTURING COMPANY, TO REZONE FROM C—ZS TO _ �'�-1; THE SAME �EING ZOO MISSISSIPPI $TREET ��E� � • � � � � 3 ' 3 M Question of noise and vibration controls raised. Petit�oner assured Council that these matters would be taken care of. Public Hearing closed. ACTION NEEDED: Put on next agenda PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL �OR STREET � IMPROVEMENT PROJECT $T. 1974-1� � � � � � � . . . . . . . � 4 — 4 � Mr. Dennis Czech, 1395 Onondaga, objected to being assessed for Bacon Drive. f•�Ir. John Fink, 465 Rice Creek Terrace abjected to assessment spread more than half way down the bTock. Mr. PauT Dannenberg, 315 Rice Creek Terrace opposed alternate roll. Mr. Quentine Freeburg, 301 Rice Creek Terrace opposed alternate ro11. ��ir. Larry Jodsaas, 347 Rice Creek 7errace opposed alternate roll. P9r. Richard Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace (Lots 21, 22, & 23) opposed to engineering methods used and a]so opposed to construction of rock retaining wall. Mr. Uarrel Wolf, 6446 Arthur, questioned why P�rthur Street had not been completed at this time. Fublic Hearing closed. NO ACTION NEEDED ' PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVMENT PROJECT ST, 1g74-2 - � � � � AND � RECEIVING COMMUNICATION IN OPPOSITION FROM EiAROLD L, SULLIVAN � . � � � � . � . � � � � � • � � • � � � 5 — 5 D � � � �INANCE Communictions from Mr. fiarold L. Sullivan and Mr. George Meissner received. Mr. James Thayer,377 66th Avenue, objected to width of 50 feet for one block. Mr. Rodney Middlestedt, 495 66th Avenue questioned higher assessment for corner lots. Mr. Thayer objected to assessment contrary to policy of preliminary hearing. �•irs. Marion Klous objected to assessment. fY9r. Donald Hinz, 372 66th Avenue objected to assessment spread more than half way down block. Mr. Roger Harmon, 388 66th Avenue objected to assessment spread. f�irs. Margaret Johnson, 374 66th Avenue objected to assessment spread. Mr. Dale Maus, 490 67th Avenue questioned the benefit and mentioned the snow is being plowed up to the homes. {'ublic Hearing cont7nued. ACTION NEEDED: Put on next agenda , 1 0 � �' ' � � � � ' ' 1 � NANCE NANCE PUBLIC HEARING MEETING, MARCH 10, 1975 PUBLIC HEARI(VGS (CONTINUED) PAGE 3 PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROWEMENT i�ROJECT $�, 1974-4� � � � . � � � � � � � . . � 6 — 6 A Mr. Flrlon Haupert, 6524 Anoka Street, questioned benefit of sidewalk to people of area. Mr. PJ�ck Garaffa �nd�cated that Mayor Liebl had said the sidewalk would not be assessed the people, f�ir. Haupert thought when the street was designated County rather than State Aid, the people should have been notified. f�lr. Thomas Haaen, 1479 Mississippi, said another public hearing should have been heid with this change, the people had been told that the s9dewalk would be free. iir. Alvin Flanders, 6501 F.,^oka Street, questioned acquisition of 3 foot easement for $1. ��r. Richard Janiak, 1479 Mississippi Street, voiced concern about damage to sidewalk. P•1r. Roger Gleason, 6535 Arthur St., s=�.id he did not oppose the sidewalk, but opposed the method of the plowing of the area. Public Hearing closed. NO ACTIQN NEEDED PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROL� FOR SEWER, WATER AND STORM SEWER IMPROV�MENT PROJECT fVo, 114� ���� % Mr. Dennis Schneider, 6790 Stinson Blvd, made a present�tion stating he spoke for 35 people in the area and they opposed being assessed for the acquisition af the ponding area, the dredging and the acquisition and improvement of the ditch. ��1r. Schneider questioned the legality of dredgir�g the marsh with the requirements of the State Statutes. Mr. Robert Kirwan, 6578 McKinley, expressed opposition to assessment and development of pon.d. Mr. �dickolas �1avrogenis, 6170 Briardale Court believed the marsh had been self sustaining. Mrs. Gene Gasparro, 1604 Briardale Rd., questioned if this would be a permanent sys�em, if the City would send statements on the amount due, ment�oned the stop sign was p7aced on wrong corner and said there is speeding on Benjamin Street. i�ir. David Harris opposed the assessments in area E bei�g-greater than Y'°m�jndar Of �rairar� ;!istrict: ""r: !-!arris objected to change of direction in that he thought the $800 would be escrowed per lot at the time the building permit was acquired. Mr. �larris questioned the increase cost of the project over the bid price. Mr. Harris asked that the older residents of the area within area E be given some consideration on the assessment. Mr. Steven Nuspl, 1640 Briardale Road, opposed dredging of marsh. A resident representing his son, Mr. Larry Morford, 6235 Kerri Lane opposed the assessment statinq he thought all of the starm sewer assessments had been paid. Public Hearing closed. NQ ACTION NEEDED OLiI BUS I irESS : RECEIVING REPORT REGARDING ZONING OF FRONTIER CLUB, %365 CENTRAL AVENUE �V� E� �RICHARD D� POVLITZKE)� ���. Received. GINEERING NO ACTION NEEDED . . � . PU�LIC HEARING MEETING, MARC� 10, 1975 NEW BUSI�IESS: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR ST. 1974-I STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. � � � � � � � . Tab 1 ed . ACTION NEEDED: Put on next agenda PAG E 4 . • � CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR ST. I9%4-Z STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT� �..�..�� IO - IO A iabl ed . ACTION NEEDED: Put on next agenda . CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR ST. �.�%4-� STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT� ...,.�, 11 - i1 A ?abled. ACTION NEEDED: Put on next agenda �, � � I� FINANCE � �� PUBLIC HEARI(VG MEETING, MARCN 10, 1975 iVEW �3USINESS (COf�ITIfdUED) PAGE 5 CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT �OR SEWER, WATER AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT i�JO, 114. . . , , , . , , , . , � , , . C , , . , , 12 — 12 A Tabled. , ACTION NEEDED: Put on next agenda and prepare appropriate information , CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING ! SIGNING THE AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING W�RKING CONDITIONS, WAGES AND HOURS OF EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY � FIRE 1}EPARTMENT FOR THE Y�AR 1975� � � � � � � . � � � Resolt�tion No. 40-1975 adopted. �TY MANAGER ACTTON NEEDED: Execute document � � I COMMUf'J I CAT I OiVS : , . 13-13Z HAROLD BELGUM, CHAIRMAN, HUMAN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: _ I NCREAS I NG P�IEMBERSH I P � � � . . � � � � � . . � � � . � . � 14 � Administration directed to research matter and report back to Council. CITY MANAGER AC7ION NEEDED: Prepare appropriate recommendations . � APPOINTMENT TO BIKEWAY/WALKWAY COMMITTEE FROM THIRD WARD: � f�lr. Jerome Krist, 148 Rivers Edge Way appointed. � �NGINEERING ACTION NEEDED: Notify appointee ADJOURN: 1:36 A.M. I� , I . FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING 'PLEASE SIGN NAME ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER INTERESTED IN DATE: �� Z��� � U / C! �.S � NAME ADDRESS TTEM'NUM6ER j =- - ------------ ---------------------------- ------ ------�-----� - -----r ----------------- ��=-=l� -__-_=_____________= __-___---___-------� V .r' (i' �`i/lX�?{-'"��1.�'(.�- C� ✓' ����6'AU I � ' 1e� ��� C � E � 1 `, � � � a/�c� - � ' �� F , � '\ �, � � , ;� � ��. � � � � a ,�o�..� � C i 7 � . �G� '✓�n/� �� � , T � , ��,� : �.� � � _ , � � s�od ��, --� �v �a--�w�5 .�� � � /.� ����,,�-� v � � � ����ti d ��I� � �-� �% l � - ��1 �.1 � � �, �-a-� 1 c�� e l� �, � 1 �S 1--� � -k- � �» . �. � � y � � ��� ' � � � �`i � ca ` G"�?rv�' .��s�,t.��--- ��D -� `� �cr���i..�.� c�- � ,� �'-�- �%� L`� �J�� G? : oc��L!�- �; � , �, .�� �� � � - ���.:-� .�i� �i�%��� ��. ,Q��.ow..� a- � . ; � , - r � - ).�--, .,�• �' f - � � �- � / � S � ,% � � ��%' ��- `-�`� �' -��—��--- UC� V ; �� � < v � . �/- � ,� ���,, vK-'2�s'JL � . I ` .J� 0 / f (�` ��t° ��� > /�=-��'.�l �` �'GL�'�.� S %'i 1��i� / -� � �� � s-�l � G��� �--� � �� � �� �� ��-��,� 7 .� `_ � �-�.-� % �� �r� � -�- �� � � �_ / . , ��� � �¢c� ,�.-�1 c�c� / ��,Y� �r� %��. '(:�zs-s�.e. ... �i 7 _ ..� . n / G-t .� �47(1 � 1 ��..�����.��'�,� �� � �a �_ -��,,�� � �� I �� I . I � FRIDLEY CIT`( COUNCIL MEETZNG �'LEASE SIGt� PdAME ADORESS AND ITEM NUh1BER INTERESTED Ih DATE: AME AQDRESS ITEM NUMBER �a�^ �5�.,�.� ________________________ � 1'� b== � � _�____� =_____--_______-__-_--�--J--�==_= � �. d� '�. {.,���n--- �r � I�0 Ir��_ �..,►��` . tt �ti��`� , r� t�.-.�` � — �'7.�� 5�� �� ���a �.� � � � � � �--- ' �1 `� �"''I � ` s" �", ST �t1, �, � s , � S Nl�n '4 t �1 tj . � �a1.3'V.,—Lu—.D/l.tN.Q /R--C� < GI/ �. P ~ ( / �-� ,�I� � �.�, � �- / � S'� 6 S�, � �-S G � ,,.3I� L� . % iig�ssis�� p% 1� o� �" ' � i� i %� i - , . ' ' � �rji��A �� , C�G % /' ,�, � � � lZ . w . 7�.� G�. �� � � � -E,�. �� Z _ �_ � '� �'i�2�� � �f�� .� 1���'� �'-I v�, lU � �7 —� ��r�.�-�--- �- � � 5 7 - � � � � � � �-.�_�- � w � �.-, I�S� rn� � �' � " � � � �,� 7�t��- . �r�� � 1 ��s G� �Si � � / ' �� - ,� ��,, � ,� ,� �/`�� � �;` � ���'. . t � , ' � , 7 ' �-�rL_ � �;�' . ' � � � � �.��c��-�/ / � o . �� "" _e�--� �. � �(.,j U✓ l�atil(�, {-�C hsen. j li-eltd. Gt- `�'�" 1� 0 t- J ��. �,S G�2 r r� �[2 h Q (( � , r � � ✓� S �" /''� / S S , /U G • i,�-�'��� � ,�:�,�.�� i�a<<,���,a���eE �y.��. �� i�� (p 1 �1 v ,�'t-t-�ch.,d-�-�c._ � �O I �� ,�-: �C.u�..� � r � , �� � l�� ,� o�ii�,,.�. ,_ _ .� � , / , . � r r , I ��� ■ � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING . 'I �LEASE SIGN NAME ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER INTERESTED IN DATE: ADDRESS ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------ � � � � i��.� . . � � �� a� `� /,��E�' i' / � �::5 /' J,,�,�� -� �, ! ' ��- � 5 r � ITEM NUMBER ------------------------------------ ---- � `------------ ----------� , crr G4 ,. �� l .. �` �� 1/�� FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL - PUBLIC NEARING MEETING - MARCH 10, 1975 - 7:30 P,M. PLE�GE OF ALLEGIAi�CE: ROLL CaLL: A1�OPT I OiJ OF AGENDA : PUBLIC HEARINGS: PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL PLAT P�S, #75-01, CENTRAL VIEW iANOR ZND ADDITION, BY REALCO, INC� �W� GllSTAVE DOTY)� �EING A REPLAT OE PARCEL �%SO, SEC. 12. GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN CENTRAL AVENUE AND HIGHWAY �65, ��IORTH OF �3� AVENUE iV , E � , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 - l F pUBLIC iiEARING ON REZONING R�auEST ZOA #75-�1, BY CENTRAL AUTO PARTS, TO REZONE FROM C-ZS TO M-1; GENERALLY LOCATED �UST IVORTH OF 1201 73� AVENUE N.E,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;,,,, 2-2A PU�LIC HEARI(dG MEETING, MARCN 10, 1975 PUBLIC HEARI�IGS (COi�'TIf�UED) PAGE � PUBLIC HEARING ON REZONING REau�sT ZOA #74-05, BY RAO I'�IANUFACTURING COMPANY, TO REZONE FROM C-ZS TO �-i; THE SAM� BEING ZQO MISSISSIPPI STREET N�E� .�.��. 3' 3 M PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEf�1ENT PROJECT ST. 1974-1. , . � . . . . . , . . . . , 4 — 4 C 1 , � � FOR STREET PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL IMPROYMENT PROJECT ST, 1974-2 . - � � - � � � � AND ' RECEIVING COMMUNICATION IN OPPOSITION FROM NAROLD L � SULLI VAN � � � � � . � � . � � � � � � � � � � � � 5 5 D � , � II � ' ' � . PUBLIC HEARING MEETING, MARCH l0, 1975 PUBLIC NEARIfVGS (CUNTINUED) PAGE 3 PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT S�, 1974-4, , � � � � � � � � � . . . � 6 - 6 A PUBLIC HEARING ON FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR SEWER, WATER ANt� STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT `�0. 114. .... OLD BUS I irESS : RECEIVING REPORT REGARDING ZONING OF FRONTIER CLUB, %36S CENTRAL AVENUE �V� E. �RICHARD D� POVLITZKE). � � � � � � � 7 . . � PU�LIC HEARING MEETING, MARCN 10, 1975 NEW BUSINESS: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR ST. 1974-1 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT� . � � � � � � � PAGE 4 . .� CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR �T� 19�4-Z STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT� � � � . . � . . 1� - 10 A CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT �OR ST� I9%4-4 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT� � . . � � � � 11-11A PUBLIC HEARI(VG MEETING, MARCH 10, 1975 iUEW �3USINESS (COPaTINUED) PAGE 'S CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR SEWER, WATER AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PRO� Ec-r iJo , 114 , , , , , , , . . , , , ; , , , , , , , , , , , 12 - 12 A CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING SIGNING THE AGREEMENT ESTABLISNING WORKING CONDITIONS, WAGES AND HOURS OF EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY FIRE l�EPARTMENT FOR THE YEAR 1975� � � . . . . . . . . . . 13 - 13 Z COMMUP� I CATIOIVS : HAROLD BELGUM, CNAIRMAN, Ht1MAN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: INCREASING ��EMBERSHIP. . � . � � � � . . . . � � . � . . . 14 ADJOUR��: � � r OFFICIAL NOTICE CITY QF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given:that there will be a Public Hearing before the City Council of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Monday, March 10, 1975 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: � Consideration of a fina7 plat, P.S. #75-01, Central View Manor 2nd Addition, by Realco, Incorporated (W. Gustave Doty), a replat of all that part of the Southeast Quarter � of the Northwest Quarter described as follows: Commencing at a point on the Easterly l�ne of the Northwest Quarter of � Section 12, which point is 726 feet South from the North- � east corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence running Westerly 1338.6 feet to a point on the West line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12, which point is distant 726 feet Sauth from � the Northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the North- west Quarter of said Section 12, then running South along said West line a distance of 140 feet; thence running East- � erly to a point, which point is 140 feet Souih from the beginning, thence running North along said East line of said Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 to the point of � beginning, all lying in Section 12, T-30, R-24, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota. ' , ' � LJ Generally lacated between Central Avenue and Highway #65, North of 73 1/2 Avenue Northeast. Anyone who desires to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this time. Publish: February 19, 1975 February 26, 1975 � . WTLLIAM J. NEE MAYOR 1 �� Planninq Commission Meetinc� January 22, 1975 � Pa9� 5 1 A � Nasim Qureshi, who was City Engineer at the time, and the members of the City Council did visit our plant, and they were satisfied at that time that this would be the proper zoning. Whether the present Council would agree with that would be something else. � � Mr. Harris asked Mr. Clark to get an opinion from the City Attorney on this question, and get the answ�r in writing. Mr. Clark said that he wouid. � MOTION by Drigans, seconded by Harris, that the Planninq Commission continue� antil February 5, 1975, the consideration of a rezoninc}'equest, ZOA #74-05, by RAO Manufactuxinq Company, to rezone from C-2S (general shopping areas) to M-1 (light , � industrial areas} Lots 3-I5, Lots 27-32, and part of Lots 2 and I6, a11 in Block 9:, along with vacated a.Zleys in B.Zock 9, and the East half of vacated Main Street lying adjacent to Block 9, a11 being in Lowe1l Addition to Fridley Park, th� same being 2'00 , Mississippi Street Northeast, to provide th� administrat.ion time to research the interpret�tion of the lanquage of the Code. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Robert A. Olson, Sr. said he ihought i� was in the best interest of RA0 Manufacturing Company to have this clarified also. Mr. Clark said they could still go to the Board of Appeals and Buildi�ng Standards- Design Control meetings as scheduled. They could make their recommendations subject to the rezoning being approved. ' 3. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED PtAT, P.S�. #7�5 0 CENTRAL VIE4V MANOR 2ND ADDITION ��1. GUSTAVE DOTY : Being a repl-at,__of Parcel 4780, Sectioro 12, City of Fridley, Coun�y of Anoka, Minnesota, generalTy^�T"ocated beiween Central Avenue and Highway #65 N.E., North of 73 i/Z Avenue--N.E..` ; f } 4..- PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIQERATIQN OF A REZDNING REQUEST, ZOA #75-01, �CENTRAL AUTO PARTS: To rezone from C-ZS general shopping areas --ta M-.1-� light industrial areas all that part of Parcel 4780, Section 12, City of Fridley, that lies be�ween the Northerly extensions of the East and West lines of Lot 10, BiocC� 1, Central View Manor, generally located just North of 1201 73 1/2 Avenue N.E. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #75-01, CENTRAL AUTO PARTS: � Per Fridley City Code, Section 205.131, (A,8 to allow junk yards or baling'of junk or rags in a building enclosed on al.l.sides or when compleiely enclosed with a solid fence, to be located on that part of 4780, Section 12, City of' � Fridley, that lies between the Northerly extension of the West line of Lot ' 10 and the East line of Lot 16, Block l, Central View Manor, to allow expansion of the boundaries of Central Auto Parts, 1201 73 1/2 Avenue N.E. � Mr, Gus Doty of Realco, Inc., and Mr. John Buzick of Central Auto Parts wer�e present. ' 1 Mr. Clark said these three requests the rezoning and special use pennit aren't plat this property. � � � should be considered together, because if approved, there would be no reason to Chairman Fitzpatrick read the Public Hearing notices on the proposed plat, P,S, #75=01, Central View Manor�2nd /�ddition, by Real'co, Inc., the rezoning reques�, ZOA #75-01, to rezone fror.� C=2S to M-1, and the request for a Special Use Permit, SP #75-01, by Central Auto Parts, all pertaining to all or part of Section 47�0, Section 12, City of Fridley, whichlies between Central Avenue �nd Highway �165 N.E., North of 1B Planning Commission Meeting - January 22, 1975 Paqe 6 73 1/2 Avenue N.E. Mr. Clark said the l�nd that was being platted was split in half a coup�e of years ago, at the zoning line by the now defunct American Auto Llstings. The East' portion of the property was occupied by Gus�afson Grinding, and the balance of the property was vacan�. Parcei 4780 was oniy 140 feet deep and 1,33� feet 7onq. Mr. Doty Wanted to have another 1ot split pn_this.pro�erty��ahich would hav� divided this parcel into three parts, but as you can tell from the Public Hearing notices> there wouid have been lengthy legal descriptions. He said he advised the petitioner to iplat the property instead. This request was before the Plats & Subdivisions-Streets &!Utilities Subcommittee on January 15th and they recommended approval with three sti�iulations which were (1) Provide a 15 foot drainage and utility easement along the Nori:herly portion of Lot 2, and on the North-South line between Lots 2 and 3, and along the South portion of Lot 3, (2) This approval subject to the rezoning request, ZOA #75-01, a�nd a request for a Special Ose Permit, SP #75-01, by Central Auto Parts, being approved, and (3) A private covenant be put on Lot 2 so that this said Lot 2, Central V:ew Manor 2nd Addition, could only be sold to adjacent property owners who already have street �ccess. Mr. Clark said thi� last stipulation was to prevent Lot 2 being sold as an isulated lot that didn't have street access. The petitioner was agreeable to these stipulatioris. Mr. Clark continued, saying that Central Auto Parts, the tentative purchaser� of Lot 2 of the proposed p1at, has requested that the Westerly 60 feet of this lo� be rezoned the same as the balance of Lot 2, which was'M-1, and that a Special�Use Permit be granted for all of the new Lot 2, so they can expand their salvage yard; He said tha� the City has had some problems with Central Auto Parts, most of them,due to the fact that they dian�'t have enough space for their operation. Their busines� has grown faster than they anticipated, so the addition of Lot 2, should solve most of their problems. They would have to discontinue parking damaged and partially dis+ mantled cars in their parking lot, whichwas supposed to be for customer parking, and: using property across the street, which they don't own, for parking. Their business would have to be confined to their own property, with a screening fence. Mr. Clark said the staff had prepared a list of stipulations for the Planning Commission to Consider in making their recommendation on the Special Use Permit. The firSt one was that there must definitely be a screening fence. The second was, that especially along the portiont;hatabuts the trailer park, there should be at ieast a 10 foot PTant�ing strip, like an evergreen hedge.� outside and adjacent to other zonied praperty, to be campleted by July 1, 1975. The third stipulation was that all storage, unloading and loading of inoperative vehicles be confined within the screening fe�nce. (4) That parking of trucks, loaded or empty, be restricted to the area inside the fenced lot, (5) That all dismantling or parts salvage be done inside the existinig building, (6� No vehicle parking be allowed in the street or on any other land that is not authorized by the City Council or the City. The last stipulation, number 7, was that this permit be for a period of time, to expire on July 31, 1976, and not be renewed unless all of the above stipulations were complied wfth. Mr. Ciark said 'the reason the staff felt this should have a yearly review was because this hasn't worked out the way we thought when the original Special Use Permit was granted. There are three ways the petitioner can go with this operation. Either reauce his operatian or move out, or acquire more land for tnis operation. h1r. Clark said that Central Auto Parts owned Lots 10-15, alock l, in Central View Manor. Mr. Fitzpatrick said that was why they were requesting the rezoning of the Westerly 60 feet of Lot 2 then, so it woiild be the same zoning. Mr. Clark s�id that Lot 2 was in line with Lots 10-16, but Lot 16 belongs to another salvage yard. Mr. Clark said there were a couple of other comments he would like to make. . 1C Plannin Commission Meetin - Januar 22, 1975 Pa e 7 ', He said the stipulation by the Buildinc� Standards-Qesi9n fence�l TheCfencettheynhave � original request for a Special Use Permit was for a wood is not a wooden one. It was an £3 foot high screen�nk sonthereiw uld begmore�room fo�perty ; line, and we would like to see this fence moved bac o some plantings. Mr. Harris said it didn'tflo��krash�fOfhwap,Wbutmwehweren�t�usedyto� � this area. Mr. Clark said there was a 60 o g seeing an eight foot structure right onrt�hWaPraPfencelonethenproperty East of�Centralok , so close. Mr. Fitzpatrick asked if the Auto Parts? Mr. Clark said there was. Mr. Drigans askedeir�fencedwa�tright in8theMr. � Doty said this belonged to Fridley Auto Parts and that th property line also. Mr. Clark said he would have to say that rhand aahabf�under�the�neweownershhp. � operiaion of Central Auto Parts in the last yea He said Fridley Auto Body has cleaned up its operation also. , Chairman Fitz���trick said he thought they should consider the preliminary plat � first, and be aware that Lot 2 in this plat did n�•t have street access. + Mr. Harris said the reason for the stipulation that haveethisalot1change�own�rt on Lot 2 was because we didn't want, at a future date, 'to ship to someone who didn't already have str�et access because the City could be placed in a position of having to condemn street-right-of-way for this property. Mr. Drigans asked why t�e proPDoty sawd�the�rebwerenlegalAcomplicationslbecau�se be included in the replatl.ing. Mr. y of mortgages, etc., which would make thes wereestipuaatingUfor this l�otYwaslaegald�o�rnit know if the type of private covenant t y not, but it would have a limit of 22 years. He said he wasn't an attorney, but once this Lot 2 was a part of Central Auto Parts, he couldn't see that it would be considered as a separate property again. It wouldn`t go tax forfeit unless all the property oti�med by Central Auto Parts �vent forfeit• sale of�Lota2dtohCentralrAutonParts,were platiing this property was to facilitate the Mr. C7ark said that if the City was put in a position where it would have to go through condemnation proceedings to give street access to Lot �, this would all. be assessed back to Lot 2. . Mr; Doty said he was sure that Central Auto Parts would be agreeable to tying_ Lot 2 to their property and maybe they cou�,d� Po tadeforpeitatthereewould�berstreet East half of Lot i5, so that �f th�s lot g access. Mr. John Buzick, Central Auto Parts, said he wouldn't want to agree to this until he had talked to his partner and�his attornelonaSaseCen�tral Auto Partsrsti�luownedS, there could be from this. Mr. Clark sa�d that as g ' Lot 2, there would be no problem even if this easement was given, because it wouldn't be used for an access to Lot 2. This would just be a solution if Central Auto Pdrts had ta sell this property. Mr. Harris said this would be a private driveway eas�ment. Mr. Quzick said he had no objection to most of the stipulations m�ntioned by Mr. Clark, but when it came to moving the fence in on the front of the property, he said there was so much sand that he couldn't see anything growing there except weeds. Mr. Qoardman said there was sand all over tin ��roWSa�f itsrjustuputhonetop of theesand. topsoil put in under the sod. He said noth g g 1 �lanninc�Commission Meetinq - January 22, 1975 Page 8 ' 1 D Mr. Quzick said that if they had to move the fence in, they would be losing � area again, and he thought they needed all the area they could get. He said the reason they didn't put in the wood fence was because it was against State regulations to �ave , a arooden fence for this type of operation. . ' ' ' e e ' � ' � I � ' r � ' � , Mr. Doty said that as long as the fence for Fridley Auto was on the property line also, he thought it was a little premature to expect Central Auto Par�s to move their fence at this time. He felt that as long as this Special Use Permit was going to be subject to yearly review, this could be taken care of at a later time, h1r. Harris said they could wait for the natural screer.ing between the C-2S zoning and the M-1'zoning until the C-2S property was developed. He said the screening fence should be brought in from the property line in this area also so the plantings could be put in at a 7ater time, without moving the fence. He said the natural screening (plantings) should be started along the R-4 zoning during this years growing season. MOTI�N b� Harris, seconded by B1air, that the Planning Commission close the Public Hearing on the proposed p1at, P.S. #75-01, Central View Manor 2nd Addition, ,by W. Gustave Doty Upon a voice vote, a11 votzng aye, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION 1i� Drigans, seconded by Harris, that the Planning Commision recommend� to Council approval of the proposed p1at, P.S. #75-OI, Central View Manor 2nd Addition, by W. Gustave Doty, .being a replat of Parcel 4780, Section 12, City of Fridley, Ca,unty of Anoka, Minnesota, generally located between Central Avenue and Highway #65 N.E., North of 73 1/2 Avenue N.E., with the following stipulations: 1. Provzde a 15 foot drainage and utility easement along the Northerly porfiion of Lot 2, and on the North-South line between Lots 2 and 3, and along thie South portion of Lot 2. � 2. Approval of this plat is subjectto the rezoning request, ZOA #75-01, and the request for a Special Use Permit, SP #75-01, both requests by Central Auto Parts, being•approved. - 3. Subject to a 30 foot private easement being granted from 73 I/2 Avenue N.E. to Lot 2, so this 1ot would have street access if evex needed. UPON a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimousZy. M07�ION by Driqans, seconded by Blair, ttiat the Planninq Commission close th� Public Flearing cin the xezoning request, ZOA #75-01, by Central Auto Parts. Upon a voice vote, aZl vating aye, the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Drigans, seconded by Bla.ir, that the Planning Commission recommend to Council approval of the rezoning request, ZOA #75-O.I, by Central Auto Parts, to r�zone from C-2S (qeneral shopping areas) to M-1 (light industrial areas), a11 that part of Parcel 4780,'Section 12, City of Fridley, that lies between the Northerly extension of the East and West lines of Lot 30, BZock 1, Central View Manor, generally located just North of .I20I 73 1/2 Avenue N.E., subject to the approval of a Special Use P�rmit,. SP #75-01, for Central Auto Parts. Upon a voice vote, a11 vot.ing aye, the motion!carried unanimously. MOTION by B1air, seconded by Narris, that the Planning Commission close the Public Ifearing on the request for a Special Use Permit, SP 1175-01, by Central Autp Parts. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. 1 . . .,�._ i� , , , , Pae9 lE Plannin� Commission Meeting - January 22, 1975 9 Mr. Quzick said he wouldn't want to agree that no dismantling at all would be done outside tl�e building. Sometimes someone needs a door or some other part for a rush job, and although they don't like to dismantle outside, in an emergency they do it. He said that he wouTd agree that no major dismantling be done outside the.building. ' The Planning Commission members agreed to this, on an emergency basis. Mr. Clark � said he would have no abjection as long as this didn't cause noise pollution. He'said they could monitor the operation, and check this stipulation at the time of renewa�l of this Special Use Permit. � r , Mr. Clark said he thought the review of this Special Use Permit should be during the growing season, rather than a year from today. If they should recommend more fencing or plantings at that time, it would be easier to comply with at that time of the year. . MOTION b� Drigans, seconded by Blair, that the Planning Commission recommenc3 to Council approval of the request for a Special Use Permit, SP #75-01, by Central Auto Parts, per Fridley City Code, Section 205.131 (I, 8), to a11ow junk yards or baling of junk or rags, in a building enclosed on a11 sides, or when completly enclosed witl� a solid fence, to be located on the part cif Parcel 4780, Section 12, City of Fridley�, that?��s between the Northerly extension of the West line of Lot 10 and the East line of Lot .Z6, Block 1, Central View Manor, to a11ow expansion of the boundaries of CGntral Auto Parts, 1201 73 1/2 Avenue N.E., raith the following stipulations: � 1. Provide an 8 foot screening fence, 10 feet from the property line. ' . - ' , . �J 2. Provide a 10 foot planting strip outside this fence. The planting strip :cin the North property line at�jacent to the R-4 zoning, to be planted in the 1975 gz'owing season. The planting strip adjacent to the C-2S zoned property along the West side of Lot 2, Central View Manor 2nd Addition, and along the West side of Lot 10, B1ock 1, Central View Manor, to be determined at the �irne of the review of the Special Use Permit, dependent upon the development of the C-25 zoned property. 3. A11 storage, unloading and Ioading of inoperable vehicles be confined inside the screening fence. . 4. Parking of trucks, loaded or emp�y, be restricted to the area inside the fenced 1ot. ! � 5. A11 major dismantling be done inside the existing building. � � 6. No vehicle parking in the street or on any other unauthorized area be allowed. � � ?. This Special Use Perrrrit wi11 expare and be up for renewal on Ju1y 31, 1976 and will not be renewed unless all of the above stipulations have been::satisfied UPON a voice vote, a11 voting aye, the mbtion carried unanimously. ' 6. DISCUSSIQN: 0 Mr. Clark said they would like to keep a light agenda for the Planning Comrt�ission ,' meeting of February 5, 1975 so this could be used as a workshop meeting. He said that Jerry Qoardman was scheduled for another meeting on that date, and would not be attending this meeting. ' , I� — - 1''w / .. /��,) '( �Dni7'10��! �' ,,�-.�—_.,,__,.�� �, �,.i � `„ . .�..�.�,..,�,.,,� t ��po � � . ._ . ,...:.._. . ..•..: -��"1° .:;., ,�';`:.� --, . ,..:,:.�- - - --- � ,'`1 : �,�_. _. , . , � I � 1 I� 1 1 � ; I �� � �I. •�;,rf� .� . .,., .. . 4 (� � j, (` �, t. ' '.,'..'�' ..� i �1tirn�� �.-sT�' _j-� • s . . � � � , J� � 1 .� 1 �� � rr �� '�i � . ..� .r � ,„ l F ,,, �..,,.� ' , ; • ,�vJ/ � v't S.rii/i ..... .�. ,.. 1/P ..�....+.�..�._ .. � f•yv,,' . ,. pw . ........ .:..9� yg 2.r �,.,:� ,i�,. ,,. c a...,,,,..., o ,:,., . � . . � . , :;'_' �ft�V�h . �� • ��� P. S. #75-01 •=,�ie.���� ���,: ,� '�'� :' :1�� Central View Manor 2nd Addn. '��,�•.,:,;�"��•'-;.�' 7 }: �;sls�. �•r�� • ' ,•J -• � - Realco, Inc. °, °R`!,.,az,,;�%�•`� .�: ;,.�•, '., ::,w ; i3�{i,;'� fp�' '-�-,. �-: � �� -------------- __ �� . :�� I • ,.,. _ �� ..,.�,._. , . . - ib rN��- �VENUE , :� y � : �, ,o > /5a rn«, 47 ,-», o.o, • or a�.,�i [.Y � • - -- �� /J<.�A,.v, r o%J r c .rri, � yCj, .���• �� ,,•, .� i /��.,� ,�. _�r--° � - i � N..�, ��.,ii� . . .: y � . . .... � . � . • ' '� � ,��:,%r �� .;.l:s , ��3j ,:,. �Sa • _ . _ .__._. ..__ . _ .. _ _... 1 � -- , '_�' __! D U � l ` S ,� f: 5 -r �,a�. �,: � • c' � i� ` i'� `� �.;_ `-'�•-;, �' • (-„ � <n : �. •- c =, �.._ —.=-_-cr — . — ----_ ---' ---- __ ,cr.. ,t . I J' j�'v - • -�.. � -. . ; � 'lj �• � � GY /6 Y' �" 1.?,` C�_'-j��::' c..-,tr,.,� W ��� � ( ) w� �'c _la.; .. ., .^ 1-_� ',. � �' ��J >- } . trd`•'� 1 ' ��so IiJ � :o►:;•••= • �; � . f �il1 � ii_i.% Q Q - --�lbl _ � � � . 7�I1�:i3�1 f- : :: F�`I3';, �� r ,.. ? ,..f. _ _.. .. •- � _....� . ______ _— —______ .. �-.- ,�"•. '.,.-,..:. •.. � :/XS', , . ' _ _`"" . , �y' ... ..-..._". _".'!�` . ... .. '.l�bsi �' •�j :s�..'T.n �f ,'�lV' - � �,f3to '�,'l {��� � ��f ,3'.),.'j1:�.��%' r. � � —' — — — � --- -- K'O � � i • : .. �� M.//v.rGG.vmi/!�/NL�6ies � :� ; � AUD T0�15 I �.7y7/lJ-�. ' � /fJlll z� » „ `V i 7Y21, �_ ---� ..r , ' f= ` W �. ' - - �:: t_�_` ,�: -(5 _nu_ Z ` . ' + ro:o• ' (uri I � I �"' - - - - � ; , �9� 1:4:t:: .. . - : �� 3 : ,4 ' •�`,'J�1 � • �1��� i��. ..v+ L.'� . , • r �., _ ,,. (< :r •' -- - --:��--------..�— -��� ; •F���•$�t7C. ..! .��I:ZIVi. �~ ' ' 1' - :i^ � � . �� � ! i's/�iRL..wA �.svo) .�, �J�r. ^ (str> .� , ,� � i�r..n � i . ' � ' i *,i . �..,.. . � . 'a . ' s�, . �' • ' , ( � tJ/ '� JI I �i ��� ��3� =i �� -� r� d� ��c !���//�'�'�1�� � ��1 . ' . L . / � Ll �_ � ; ., f 73 I/2 A`✓E. N.E. �. 1 ; � l,' : - -i�i —�;� ' • I '�• � 113�' , �;,�j .:, l, � � /Ja I 7S . ����: f. +:: �, .. d�� _; , ,t ,- o .;. , ,�,>> ��o � f -` - N. E: ...._... ; _. ....._..... .� '�� _--- : � �� ./3�� •is,�- . �r3'i� rf 1 . ` . � - % +;+'v'''. �� r � - �^� .- ��- �' t� t' � ��,-�, > �,<<L,v_f,.:ri•��I�-..���� ►J.�;.��%� r�..a. d � . : ' Z � �/33 S � E ..,..•r ��'.->,., j'?6S ��i)?f;tyc i . _ Ie �., � ;�z�� � ! , � ,: � /l.t:.+::y .,� F�!'i /!l . t � � I I .� Y ) � ' I�-�- , �.� �.�: � �.-- f �� �4 ' :j '���...�..� � i• ; ,_��j ,� i ,� ,,-1 ,f� ,, '; c�o � , � � ' �• .., . . --� ' ' ,1 '! '�iS%a /Jee�/.jaL�1390 =t.' � .f"l,� If:�/i. � lJ , : _�� 3 : .� �� . �; J3��=�� ���.l�OIT/���'l� � : "' , ���-' ): ..','� �-` .y.:.ri.:.- ., > i f • 7 �.. t:' •:.r, :� )� � �� , � 73`� �y t'� "�, 5� ± y 7 �� �i ,�_._ $t/f 1„s..:.� ' �'�yy1. u> � �.rJ✓/r!il,f " !J' :ui ; � .�: J • e ,//:� � � ` � �,,,4�s i? , i,.�,� , 9 3i S� � ; f i ' �� if.ffa3!i:v,' .�1?UY �: ► '''� " �,,,;� : s�P 0 ,� . ..,. �2� ... j ...; _ -.-r----�--------=�_..: `'_..' " � � '�, �:'� ; , -7 ��NrER -'�COUMTY STATE A!� HIGHYfs17 ' t � . :: S�c. /Z ,, �. . 'r �� • . � tr ��Q�a 'a��u4 �t t,. A-t-T�tc, o � . . a, • . ; �� , � . I� G-l1-LL1J A R� � Fo 2 1' , -- SP�c���. usr �,� • . 1��Rv�n'�T. ;� . . ij • i� . • �A¢�A F 02 • � . tZ't�Z.Ur..��r.J� � j J � . '{ � ' . • .j ' � : � � � � ' � L� , � � LJ � �J � � , ' �J OFFICIAL NOTICE CITY OF FRTDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is he�reby given that there will be a Public Hearing before the City Council of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6431 University Avenue Northeast on Monday, March ]0, 1975 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M. for the purpose of: Cons�.deration of a rezoning request, Z0A #75-01, by Central Auto Parts (John Buzick) to rezone from C-2S (general shopping areas) to M-1 (light industrial areas) all that part of the following described parcel that �ies between the Northerly extensions of the East and West lines of Lot 10, Block l, Central View Manor, Com- mencing at a point on the Easterly line of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, which point is 726 feet South from the Northeast corner of the South�ast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, thence running Westerly 1338.6 feet to a point on the West line of said Soutneast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12, which point is distant 726 feet South from the Northwest corner of said Southeast Quarter of the Narthwest Quarter of said Section 12; then running South along said West line a distance of 140 feet; thence running Easterly to a point, which point is 140 feet South from the beginning, thence running North along said East line of said Northwest Quarter of said Section 12 to the point of beginning, all lying in Section 12, T-30, R-24, City of Frid]ey, County of Anoka, Minnesota. Generally loeated just North of 1201 73 1/2 Avenue N.E. Anyone who desires to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this time. Publish: February 19, 1975 February 26, 1975 WILLIAM J. NEE MAYOR 2 . 13 - —' � I � I' �� 2 A , �� � . I ZOA #75-01 CENTRAL AUTO PARTS . � ezone rom - (general shopping areas) � " 3 , i to M-1 (light industrial areas) � ' 1 ! ,� I � n� j �, �.,� �'�KE '� i i ja�y I jpn�0 Cem �al jwy� [omT✓t�N NH \ ����ryl IQ R�a � + t . t [v �.�'I I � ry.�l ! Cem�woa� � �� J `� tPi••l�5 .8 . p I �, � I I � F . . . -J . _ ' _ ' � Iy . � PAUI ' ' � _ i -•- ��W n ' _ �" /z ._-oceonw4--..� '� . ..—r�o�o � . q'y�A � •• 'r' . CiTr iMiT � � � ./' �'�Mf� ������ A� .'.{ -yo -1 .'.� j s•F.ef{tir�v � � �Ail, � \ F nU : ' f !o �3. 1', -ffiIICF G � 1 i � DaRrt$T' .�A �\d��� f �i!,�__. �• � l, . �` a . � � :�4 '.� ! ELEMENT4RY - \ �\\ �� :r ,Y,�R �. s ' . �� {I/� ' �T � � ` � put� to1 �O i �_ ^i� 5 MO 61 �: ���� ° > �e '���. ��� � -�� f^ � E 3- • , � � \ � UN�TY „ �.i:�-.�.��:_ � � s � � s �� � rt"�_ n, � ��I ( DI NOSPITAL a -'j - i: , n� \\� \\`� ro ����� ' o + ry .� «, ' E.� o f/i � . � . ♦�I I � 2 ]fiT GYE J � \ � - - 16'H � AvE N�„_" �. ." d.., LP . ,� - _ iis WM ', f, f(�� iu1 �� � �_ ' p,' ' � • t '� �'',. L � e •PD'�. . �� ,'f Eh'� NU' � p��' �. L� _ . . tar. I .. + � • e . � � + //BI _ � �Jo � z �� L �� < , f j� t3, s y � � � �� �s � �� ...: e � , , , , � ir � H i _.. � 0. _ _ . �! .� . 6� f [" , } i n nJ �� � �'� yus. .. ° � '^:. '. : ' . �� � - 3 c.io� �� �' ` � �� �� �- g _ .: . 6 5 �� 1 P 3 _ . - � �\� �,}' � � �� �� � A' t 6 �' i � ' �T ' � '. /./ . ��\� L > Tu ... A'�ENJE /r N .� _ ` r, ]STH PVE NE. ' '\ \\ Vf' � �yKpy � � � � i� .y ♦ ) t � • f � I 2 e 1 � • �• i t � l fi �. ! � i� " _ _ _. ' . � c > p � r a � � � ae � ; � �� }� " . �/� y� - — - ��' ¢ l �—�V i .. y � � tI I J _ � �� •� �r ��f�T���l , i , �.. ' , • '�'�a s'�� � �^' _ � r. i�r ` .•)•:' : °, �"' SUBQ�95 N � . .� � � , � �� C � V� e 1 � �t� • " �. r���� �� ..+� , . Y • s�. �%j� , �� � ' � � {�, �, ! r � :�V� . m .��Y ����'� i . .I rI - ��� �� .. ' < � r � �"' � i i�"' ' � �:�— � ,: ��� �a t�? ,A � (�,}i�' � . ,e ,. � � � ,� w �� � � , i �p R��A.! � ° �� �.__L:�Tr�l � � � � F-I � � � ' �,: , '� � F _ ! � �ti. �,.`\,�:'� �..'..'�— „ � � i `j � ,. � � � 7%�/�,'%� ��, , �j �., htApSEN� CN '� i 7 � �yI A/� Av rvUE H.E f' a 1� IJ /;• � I '226 2 l - ' PA R K ; C - i c t. �i'��ty�f���' _`. -�llL. � `: ` � . 1 � ° I --- 1� Ce�'_�i��C.. '..... ���e ovlH:r NE 1,.+�r"�,f � �y. ( ENUE ' N E I':'ATE !01 ,.ni� piD 3G� I y� �(�f f /'!' .' ['.f'YY��e " ,� %/�,Y ��•^ . �y�+y-�'*' ; �� , ' : , . �r � ///J � �t' � -. . ' '.' � . . , `� ' 13�/ �y�� .��.? ...'...'� '.. ' :.�. . . -: .'; �':��.� ., ..� �� .'.. � . ' : . . . � . ' : . ' : . � "'. � 9>�' . �.�..� �' ..�. . . ..'.' . .1'� .' i,� J9. '/..� '.'�,�.��`I , � -. �� . � .. , ,�i � ��,�. �.�'�.�..�"...•�•". •.�'�'�. ���'•:�.,�,•'•. !� ;,// �::; ��: ��f/ .��Nf�""`�'5,4��i2qz ,,c,' : :; .. ' ��'..: � :..� : ':.:.��,� .:,�'.�� .��,�� ,� ,!���:�.�� � j.�j����..� �,,�;;;::�..s.���:;;, <::�sa; . :,:: .;'/;,/�..,..:.. '.�:...'.��..;�,'':..�.`'�./��' �«000. .. �. ...I.J� i ..J// .vX.,_ ' „ . , :. �,.. •.�� .. .. .,.. ':.. .... .. ..��:.. ���...- �..��:.:��-:.���:.����:. "/:J./f f.-. .�fy�����/yJ � . .. .,,.,..,...,� : ...,. .., . ...�... .. .. .. .. ,. ,/.. .. ':. �':. :.':/X/./'r���l��./�. �///yyy�f.-. '..'. (�..,,..,..,;."297' �.�„";; �.. :: Y:.. ::. ':. ':.; ".. ':.; �:'/ ".: �' : . � � ' .. - . . . � ' : � � . Y / �� . . . . . . . � �ii11��UIfi�23 ':=-P�'Z � ' �: .� r'� • E.., r �" � ; , f . � � l:: . ✓ , ��'' C , t >/,%./�-,'%,7'� � ...y,� . . � ' ' . . � �� : � � . �� - ' '..:c � 1uj'j�� z �� i:t��''�...-;- „!•' '��f°��'•:�.�"��...'�•.�'��'� I tOCkE .:. `_ ' - A4RK . " � , • . ��' . . _ `'.. ,, , . ' r '. + ., `. ✓ -. , _ � ��� . , .. ,. . . . � ��. ,.. .. . . =I ��' .' .' .•', '� • . . •.•, •. .. �. . . � ` 1. Q X:i _ � � .:3 ... �; � . J �n � -- y' � `-' . _ `' .. t i " . - ' . . � .J � t . � . � ' � J ', �'� i � [ � : �„1 . � - ' . � ,.. f .. �, f = . �.i � �; � • ..� • . � �lr " = � MD t, `J` y � �•� '.� . a - O51 � %'a lGl1 Iv C ,�, "!�'. Z. ��i �� .�� �(F , 2 _ � _ W � R, � , ,. ,� i ;, -+ ��"�' 3� �,,C,�' � ���� o, � ; ` 'DR I S O i) ; � �R�• a �, 6 • r r-y c i"s"s's ;; -+ .��. ��a'{.i �f�. ,�,� � � .NE 69 h.i 4,11..w= V ��� � r � /.��/ N VCN4HN 11 � •m �f�1R � L �7 v �•''� y C �� <�y '.J ♦l�.J�• � -�. / � ' ` `, /� � -t'� ,'h � L° � f �� � . b �. � , r '". • � c�� i s .t . AUD/TO 'S UB � l `� . S ' �. .�i � • i�� I �` , .N� .I. � �^j' Ir r. . `- .'.. RiC CFE[K �✓�.l . �� ^ � � aa t„� • 2• � p' .s�cac �'��cc cnc �,� o . 'Q �,'_�r= r , . � ' , , . • : � t ' �+ . �a N , ,; . e ., U � �,' . • t _ , . . , �1 , Ey 't , � . >i E; : �% d � r -.�. ' • � �l 1� �, � . _ .. ,� ; � i � r� 6 '� � �... � R Q•, �' , : �. .._ . .• ,� �� _. „ .. . , i t , . . `+ m, a � � V .� ; pu B cH _ 4 � �� ' � -- J c� �. ...; � �ik , ,M o \ Y[IVL*�l$� q• p � -5 �v ��, _ j. �. E �,g� > E���M'7 N c 7 �oqF I . • I • '� • � � �p �"' ;`�� , 2 w �- sGMOO�.' � ' -� � . . .� '.��w. i �.�e�a� • '�, �.� �� ` _ ;.� •, � ' iea �N-, ': - � � � I �I� � �� b r�i 1 ' a �.1. i,l,���w�a� • ,q � ..,. , DIbT. 1 j wk. G..M r... P�oi 2 :. _ IJ�r1 Q o' -�� . i �2' . nArES� "' �� � • � o I F EIEM£NiwR� � J -- , •,2 ' - - l � � � ��IaC /� • $CMOOi (DIST tdl6 - - �, a' ' - y_. -� 5��t(T , Y 11 ♦ \ 1 ♦ GtR LT � ! i 0 I ' �N� ' ' E ! _ � su — i ' N � - — ^ :�, � - . . „ 0 v. W ��, � _ N BB J , . � � . . ...: .,� • . . . . :. . . . "' F i . , � ,r. r� ' : o�,! _ . t , : . � rf � _ - ' _ T '^ �, , � . ,: Q , � = j � c � � � � �' � .�. r - . . , , . -- - � . ; S i _ _ f aw�iE :� � `S �'L � � � � � ' � � � OFFICIAL NOTICE CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TO WNOM IT MAY CONCERN: Notice is hereby given that there will be a public Hearing before the City Council of the City of Fridley in the City Hall at 6471 University Avenue Northea�t on Monday, March 10, �975 in the Council Chamber at 7:30 P.M, for the purpose of: Consideration of a rezoning request, ZQA #74-05, by RAO Manufacturing Company, to rezone from C-2S (general shop- ping areas) to M-1 (light industrial areas), Lots 3- 15, parts of Lots 2 and 16, Lots 27 - 32, all in Block 9; vacated alleys in Biock 9; and the East half of vacated Main Street, lying adjacent to said Block 9, all being in Lowe11 Addition to Fridley Park, lying Westerly of the West line of the plat of Sylvan Hills Plat 6, and lying Northerly of the North Tine of the piat of Sylvan Hills Plat 8, all lying in the South Half of Section 14, City of Fridley, County.of Anoka, Minnesota. � � , � ' ' � Generally located between Main Street and Second Street N.E., South of Mississippi Street N.E. Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to the above matter may be heard at this time. Publish: February 19, 1975 February 26, 1975 WILLIAM J. NEE MRYOR , , � � � ' planninc� Commission Meeting January 22, 1975 Page 2 �74-U8, Nerwal Rice Creek Terrace, the same being 1271 Rice Creek Road N.E. Public Nearing open. 3A � Mr. Boardman s�-�.d the petitioner had notified the staff that the developer � of this property lived�in Detroit, and ���ould not be present for this meeting.� He requested that tnis request„be continued until s�ch" time as the developer. would be available to answer questions�--regarding the,;.operation of this business. ' MOTIDN by Drigans, seconded by�.Blair,�that the Planning Commission continue �the request for a Special Use Permit,,-SP #74-17, by George Walquist, to permzt the con- struction of a building for rust proofinq o�,automobiles, etc., per Fridley City Code, , Section 205.13I (A,10) inr.ari M-1 zone (light 1.ndustrial areas) to be located on Lpt 5, • of a proposed p1at, P S:'N74-O8, Herwal Rice Creek Terrace, the same being 1271 Rice Creek Road N.E., unt'11 the petitioner can have the'developer of this property appear , before the P1ar�ning Commission. Upon a voice vote, a31� voting aye, the motion carried unanimousl y . °-----_� � r ' 2. PUBLIC HEARI�:G: CONSIDERA"fION OF A REZONING RE UEST;�.ZOA ir74-05,� BY RAO MANUFAC= TUEZING COi�IPANY: To rezone from C-ZS (gene� al shopp�ng areas• -°t�o M-1 1 ight 'indus- ' trial areas), Lots 3-15, Lots 'L7-32, and part of Lots 2 and 16, all in Block 9; vacated alleys in Block 9, and the East half of vacated Main Street, lying adjacent to B1ock y, al1 being in Lowell Addition to Fridley Park, the same being 2U0 Mississippi Street N.E. Chairman Fitzpatrick read the Public Hearing notice, for the rezoning reque$t, ZOA #74-05, by RAO Manufacturing Eompany. Mr. Robert A. Olson, Sr., Chairman of the Board, Mr. Robert A. Olson, Jr.,, , President, and Richard A. Olson, Jr., Vice President, all of RAO Manufacturing Company were present. ' Mr. Richard Olson said that RAO Manufacturing Company was a corporation engaged mainl y in the manufacture of sheet metal stampings, deep drawings, stamp and assemb7ies, along with tool and die making, engineering and re late d i tems to t his pr oc e s s. I� n 1970 we purchased approximately 5 acres at 200 Mississippi Street N.E. We went ahead with preliminary soil samples, etc., and also approached the Fridley City Council for land use approval, which was granted. At that time we mentioned that approx�mately half this property was zoned commercial and that it would have �o be rezoned industrial for our use. The Council had no objection to this rezoning. He said they had been �rying to demolish the old buildings on this land and they have run into some problems with this, but we hope to have it completed very shortly. We are planning to start construc- �tion on this property this spring with completion within six months. We also have a purchase agreement of a pie shaped wedge of approximately 68 feet that was west of their property, along the railroad right-of-way. He said this was part of alock 7, Lowell Addition to Fridley Park and was about 3/4 of. an acre that is zoned M-1. He said they were proposing to construct a building of about 50,000 square feet whieh is 200 feet by 240 feet by 20 feet high. It would be built basically in the center of the property, 220 feet from the Easterly boundary of the property. The reason fvr building at this location was because of the underpass project on Mississippi Street, which will limit our access to the building to the Easterly portion of the property. Any future expansion of this building would be to the West. He presented a colored rendering of the proposed metal building which he said would have earthy colors. Mr. Qoardman said they did''have an option on the location of the building. T.�f for some reason, the rezoning was denied, they could locate the building on prop�erty • � ; 3B ' P]anniny Commission Meetinq - January 22, 1975 Page 3 that ►,►as already zoned M-1 and use the C-2S zoned property for parking. He said ' it would be better to have the property all under one zoning, for resale purposes and because it would also be easier to administer. � � � � � � Mr. Robert A. Olson, Jr., said the only way they would want io use this property was if it all had the same zoning. The property wouldn't have the same potential othervrise. Ne said the proposed 50,000 square foot building could be expanded to 100,0U0 square feet if this property was all M-1. If they could only build on the property that was presently zoned M-1, they could only expand their building to 75',000 square feet. He said the main reason for moving their business from Minneapolis ; to this location was so that they would have room for expansion. ' Mr. Harris asked Mr. Boardman that if this property was expanded to iis maxi�num, would there be enough room for parking? ' Mr. Richard Olson answered Mr. Harris. He said their present plan called far 57 stalls. Under the City Code we would need 52 stalls, and if this 50,000 square foot building was used to the maximum, we would need 63 stalls. On this sarne .irawing, we have provision for up to 100 stalls. If a�e went to the maximum of 100,000 square feet, we would need 165 stalls. This would all be on the Easterly portion of the'lot. We do have room on the West for additional parking. He said they knew they had ta provide additional parking as they expanded the building, so their expansion would be somewhat determined by this factar. Ne said he couldn't foresee expanding this property to its maximum in his lifetime, and who knew what mass transit there could be at that time, which could change parking requirements. Mr. Harris asked what the setback requirements would be from adjoining prop�rties? , Mr. Boardman said the property to the West was industrial (M-1) and the buildingrnet the requirement there. South of the property was zoned R-3, and it meets the setback requirement for that zoning. East of the property the zoning was C-2S, and it me� the � se.tback requirements. Ne said there was some R-7 property across f rom part of the front of the building, so th� entire setback for the front of the building should be 100 feet. RAO Manufacturing Company will be going to the Board of Appeals for a front yard variance from 100 feet to 70 feet. Mr. Qoardman said it was felt that Mississippi Street was a lnatural barrier between this property and the R-1 and would act as a buffer. If �he variance was granted, we felt it was better to have this variance on the front se�back rather than the rear yard so the building wouldn't infringe on the R-3 zoning. Mr. � Boardman continued that RAO would be using berming and landscaping acrass from the R-1 zoning which would be an additional buffer. � � � ' � Mr. Robert A.Olson, Sr. said he felt this was a very unique piece of'land. In view of the fact that h1ississippi Street was going into an underpass situation, tF�e only access to all this property was on the Eastern end. It was a good thing for the City to have this property under one ownership because of this one access. He said there wasn't even access to service the sanitary sewer line on this property from the street. Ne said RAO would provide access for tflis purpose. He said that no way would RAO .want' go ahead with the development of this property, with all the money it would cost for its development, and take a chance on getting.it all the same zoning at a future date. He said that at the tirre they acquired this property, there weren't any plans to upgrade Mississippi Street. Mr. Drigans asked how the access to this property was laid out in relationship to the underpass? Mr. Boardman said he thought there was about a four foot drop over the entire parking lot, and about a 2 foot drop from the parking lot to the stree�t. The grade starts to drop on Mississippi Street in the vacinity of 2nd Street. Mr. Cl;ark said there would be about a 1% grade from the street into the parking lot of RAO. Ne Page 4 � � � Planning Commission Meeting January 22, 1975 -- i � � , l , �J J ' said the'grade on mississippi Street would be�about 5%. Mr. Langenfeld said that he had noticed in the Council minutes of January 18, 1971 that Mr. Ulson, Sr. had said that they wanted to be good neighbors, that they' would save all the trees they could in the development of this property, and that truck traffic would be kept toward the railroad right-of-way, and that they did not intend their building to be an eyesore. Mr. Dick Olson said they had gone with the earthy colors for this building because that seems to be the most popular concept at this time. Mr. Langenfeld asked if they had a night shift. Mr. Dick Olson said they di'd. They were in operation from 6 A.M. to 11 P.M. He said they have worked on the noise levels for both their employees and noise coming from the building itself. He said it was a quiet operation, and the design of the new building would have the production end of ihe business in the center of the building. He said he didn't �think noise would ever be a probiem and they had to meet the OSHA standards. Mr. Robert Olson, Sr. said he would ansGNer the question on the truck tr�;ffic. He said it had been iheir intention of having the trucks use an access near the railroad right-of-way, but due to the underpass, this was now impossible. � Mr. Harris asked if at any future date they were planning on a railroad spur�. Mr. Dick Olson said they had no desire for one at this time, and doubted if they �rould ever need one. MOT.ZON by Blair, seconded by Harris, that the Planning Commission close the Pub.Zic Hearing on the rezoning request, ZOA #74-05, by RAO Manufacturing Company. Upon a voice vote, all voting a�e, the motzon carried unanimously. � Mr. Qrigans questioned if this type of manufacturing was allowed in M-1 zoning, which was the zoning the petitioner was requesting. He said the Code says that foundaries or metal fabrication plants are an excluded use �n an M-1 district. . '. Mr. Harris said he thought this was a problem of technology again. He said'that what the intention of the Code meant to exlude was forged steel metal fabrication', but just plain metai fabrication was something much different, such as just making me:tal � frames for windows, for instance. Mr. Dick Olson said that because of the quietness of their operation, he thought they would conform to the requirements of M-1 zoning. Mr. Clark said they did appear before the City Council in 1971 and got land use appro�val ' �for this business, and were only told to get their entire property under the same zoning, which was M-1. � Chairman Fitzpatrick said that if there was a serious question on whether �his was a permitted use in M-1 zoning, this should probably be continued until we ge� clarification. � Mr. Drigans said on one hand we have an operation with a low noise level and they are in light metal fabrication, and on the other harid the Code says that metal fabrication plants are an excluded use in h1-1 zoning, which probably means pounding and forging out � of heavy meta] products. He said he would like an interpretation of the languag� of the Code. ' , Mr. Robert A. Olson, Sr. said that four years ago when they appeared befor� the Council, We were assured that we did comply with the regulations of M-1 zoning. Ne said � a ' . � � � �� 3D Planninq Commission Meetinq - January 22, 1975 Page 5 _ Nas-im Qureshi, who was City Engineer at the t9me, and the members of the City Council did visit our plant, and they were satisfied at that time that this would be the proper zoninq. Whether the present Council would agree with that would be something else. Nlr. Harris asked Mr. Clark to get an opinion from the City Attorney on this question, and get the answer in writing. Mr. Clark said that he vrould. MOTION by Drigans, seconded by Harris, that the Planning Commission continue � until 1'ebruary 5, 1975, the consideration of a rezoninc}'equest, ZOA #74-05, by RAO Manufacturing Company, to rezone from C-ZS (general shopping areas) to M-1 (liqht industrial areas) Lots 3-I5, Lots 27-32, and part of Lots 2 and 16, a11 in B1 ock 9', along with vacated a.Zleys in Block 9, and the East half of vacated Main Street lying i adjacent to Bloc�: 9, a1.1 being in Lowe11 Addition to Fridley Park, the same being 2!00 Mississippi Street Northeast, to provide the administration time to research the in�erpretation of the language of the Code. Upon a voice vote, alI voting aye, t1�e , motion carried unanimously. � � � � � � �� , � � � Mr. Robert A. Oison, Sr. said he thought it was in the best interest of RAO, Manufacturing Company to have this clarified also. Mr. Clark said they could still go to the Board of Appeals and Building Standards- Design Control meetings as scheduled. They could make their recommendations subject to the rezoning being approved. ' 3. PUE3LIC NEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED PLAT, P.S. #75-01, CENTRAL VIE�;I MANOR 2ND ADDITION W. GUSTAVE DOTY : Being a replat of Parcel 4780, Section 12, City of Fridley, County of Anoka, Minnesota", generaiiy located between Central Avenue and Highway #65 N.E., North of 73 1/2 Avenue N.E. 4. - PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REZOiVING REQUE�T, ZOA #,75-01, CENTRAL AUTO PARTS: To rezone from C-2S general shopping areas to M-1 light industrial areas all that part of Parcel 4780, Section 12, City of Fridley, that lies between the Northerly extensions of the East and West lines of Lot 10, Blocl� 1, Central View Manor, generally located just North of 1201 73 1/2 Avenue N.E. ,: f 5. PU6LIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #75-01, CENTRAL AUTO pARTS: Per Fridley City Code, Section 205.131, (A,8) to allow junk yards or baling'of junk or rags in a building enclosed on all sides or when completely enclosed with a so�id fence, to be located on that part of 4780, Section 12, City of' Fridley, that lies between the Northerly extension of the West line of Lot 10 and the East lin� of Lot l6, Block l, Central View Manor, to allow expansion of the boundaries.of Central Auto Parts, 1201 �3 1/2 Avenue N.E. � Mr, Gus Doty of R alco, Inc., �and Mr. John Buzick of Central Auto Parts were present. � � Mr. Clark,-said these three requests should be considered together, because 'if the rezoning and special use pennit aren't approved, there would be no reason to' plat this pr,operty. � . Chairman Fitzpatrick read the Public Hearing notices on the proposed plat, � p,S, #75�01, Central View Manor 2nd llddition, by ReaYco, Inc., the rezoning reques�, ZOA #75-01, to rezone from C-2S to M-1, and the request for a Special Use Permit, SP #75-01, by Central Auto Parts, all pertaining �o all or part of Section 4780, Seetion 12, City of Fridley, whichlies between Central Avenue �nd Highway #65 N.E., North of � �J � � ' � �J � � � �1 � � � � � � , ' Planning Comn�ission Meetin� - Februa� 19, 1975 Paqe 2 3 E RECEIVE QO�RD OF APPE�LS SUQCOMMITTEE MINUTES: JANUARY 28, 1975 MOTION by Driqans, seconded by Blair, t1�at the Planning Commission receive the minutes of the aoard of Appeals Snbcommittee meeting of Januar� 28, 1975. Upon a vaice vote, a11 voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. . 1. GONTINUED• PUaIIC HEARING• REQUEST FOR � SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #74-17, QY GEORGE t�IAL UIST: To permit the construction of a bu�ld�ng for rust proofing of automobiles, etc., per Fridley City Code, Section 205.131, (A,10), in an M-1 zone (light industrial areas) to be located on Lot 5, of proposed plat, P.S. �74-08, He wal Rice Creek Estates, ihe same being 1271 Rice Creek Road N. E. �` ,�'`' � Publ i c Neari ng open :�ro, �. �' °� - Mr. Clark said the petitioner has not responded as yet. The person who will operate this business is from out of state. He said this had been on the, Planning Commission agenda for at least.60 d���s, so he would write to the peti�ioner and tell him to respond so that action can be taken on this request, one �•ray or the other. Mr. Drigans said the Pianning Commission had requested specific informa- tion about this opera�;ion and -Felt that when they received this information they would sti11 have to deliberate on this information before:a decision could be made. Ne said their original motion had been to continue this request indefinitely. Mr. Clarlc said that enough time has passed so that action should be taken. MOTION by Blair, seconded by l,indblad, that the Public Hearing for the reques for a Special Use Permit, SP #74-17, by George Walquist be continued u�ti1 March 1975 only to a11ow the administration time to contact the petitioner. Upon a voice vote, a11 voting aye, fhe motion carried unanimousl�. .�°'��"� 2. CONTINlJED: Pl18LIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A REZONING REQUEST,�ZOA #74-05,': BY RAO ��iANUFACTURING COMPANY: To rezone from C-2S, general shopping�-areas-`"' to M-1, (light indus�rial areas), Lots 3- 15, Lots 27 - 32, and parts of Lots 2 and 16, all in Block 9; vacated alleys in Block 9, and the East Ha1f of vacated Main Street lying adjacent to Block 9, all being in Lowell Addition to Fridley Park, the same being 200 Mississippi Street N.E. ,� Publ ic f�earing closed. Mr. Robert A. Olson, and Mr. Richard A. Olson of RAO Manufacturing Comparny were present. Vice Chairman Harris said that alihough the Public Hearirrg was closed, if the petitioners had any questions or comments they could do so. Mr. Clark said this request was continued until we could get a response from our City Attorney on whether this was an allo�ved use in M-1 zoning. Mr. Clark said he did write to the City Attorrrey and this letter was on page 35 in the agenda and the response from the City At�orney was on page 36 and 37. He said this response does c�o into some detail on the Code, but the basic response was that this would be a permitted use in a M-1 district. • MOTION by Drigans, seconded by Blair, that the Planninc� Commission receive the .tetter from W10 I+fanufacturing Company dated January 10, 1975, the memo from Darrel Clark to Virgil Nerrick, City Attorney dated January 23, 1975, and the memo from the City Attorney dated January 30, 1975. Ilpon a vo.ice vote, a11 voting a�e, i�� Plannin Commission Meeting - February 19, 1975 Paqe 3 3 F the motion carried unanimousl�. . • � Mr. Drigans said he felt that the ques�ion on whether this business was an allo��red use in M-1 zoning has been answered to his satisfaction by the City � Attorney. lie said he didn't know if the Planning Commission had discussed any other stipulations. Mr. Clark said the stipulations had been pretty well covered by the Quilding � Standards-Design Control and Qoard of Appeals Subcommittees. He said both these subcommittees had recommended approval subject to the rezoning being approved. ' Mr. Clark said the only stipulation that shouid be made was that this busi�ness meet the noise transmission section of the City Code and the P.C.A. standards. He said he was sure the petitioner was aware of these standards. , ' � r � � � � lJ � � � � � MOTION by Drigans, seconded by Lindblad, that the Planning Commission recammend to Council approval of the rezoning request, ZOA #74-05, by RAO Manufacturing Company, to rezone from r-2S (aeneral shopping areas) to N-I (Zight industrial areas), Lots 3 through 15, Lots 27 through 32, parts of Lois 2 and I6, a11 in B1ock 9; vaca�ed alleys in Block 9; and the East Ha1f of vacated Main 5treet 1�ing adjacent to B1ock 9, a11 being in Lowe11 Addition to Fridley Park, the same being 200 Mississippi Street N.E. with the stipulation that R�iO Manuafact�ring Company meet a11 the noise tran�-_' mission requirements of the F'ridley City Code and the M,�.C.A. standards, Upon a ro11 ca11 vote, Lindblad, B1air, Drigans, Harris a11 votinq aye, no nays, the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Clark told the petitioner he would send them a copy of the City Attorney's me�o. 3. REQUEST FOR A LOT SPLIT, L.S. #75-01, DEAN NARMON: Split off the Easterly 8 f�et of the North 1/3 of Lot 4, except the East 85 feet, except the West 25 feet, and except the North 30 feet f,or public utilities and street, Auditor's Subdivision No. 108, (Parcel 440) and add it to the East 85 feet of the North 1/3 of Lot 4, 4uditor's Subdivision No. 108, (Parcel 450), the same being 1600 and 1618 Onondaga Street N.E. :y'�� � � ,: Mr. & Mrs. Dean Harmon, 1618 Onondaga Streei N.E. and Mr. & Mrs. Charles Brisbin, who�are purchasing 1618 Onondaga Street N.E., were present. Mr. Clark aid that Mr. Harmon owns both parcels. When the attached garage was built at 1618 Oiiondaga Street an error was made and this garage infringes on the next parcel by 3 feet. This parcel is 85 feet and with the additional 8 feet the iot wiii be 93 feet wide. 7hen the garage wi�l meet the sideyard requirement of 5 foot. The reinaining parcel will be 8Q feet wide and this will meet the front yard and area requiren�ents of�.the code. This lot�split was an obvious thing that should be done, to place the garage on the proper lot. The administration would like one stipulation and that was to obtain a fifteen foot triangle on the Northwest corner of parcel 440 (1600 Unondaga Street N.E.) for future radius on a street that will pro�ably go,in sometime on the Western boundary. �'` ti.. Mr. Harris said that request had n�ot been before the Plats & Subdivisions- Stree�s & Utilities Subconnnittee. Mr. C1`ark said that at the time this reques;t was made, the petitioner had a loan closing--that would have prohibited the're-being time t;a schedule this meeting. Because of the cancellation of the February 5�h Planning Commission Meeting, there would have been time, but as this was a fa�rly simple split, he felt that it would not be necessary to have this go to the Sub- 1 � � � � ' , ' �I � MEMORANDUM To: Darrel Clark, Community Development Administrator From: Virgil C. Herrick, City Attorney Re: M-1 Code Interpretation for RAO Manufacturing Company Date: January 30, 1975 I acknowledge receipt of your memo dated January 23, 1975, regarding the above subject. Attached to said memo was a letter from Richard A. Olsen, Vice President of RAO Manufacturing Company, and copies of council minutes of January 18, 1�71. In the memo you ask my opinion as to whether the proposed use of ' the subject property by RAO Manufacturing Company would be permitted under the City of Fridley Zoning Code pertaining to M-1 districts. You indicated in your memo that RAO would do "metal stamping". r ' ' � � Fridley City Code Section 205.132 lists those uses that are excluded in an M-1 district. One of the excluded uses is"foundries or metal fabrication ' plants". The code does not specifically refer to "metal stamping". I presume that metal stamping could be a type of inetal fabrication; however, it would be my opinion that all forms of inetal stamping are not to be excluded from M-1 districts. I know that we presently have industries located on M-1 property ' that do engage in metal stamping. It would be my opinion that the governing section on this tgpe of use would be 205.133, entitled General Performance Standards. This section reads in part as follows: "Uses which because of the nature of their opera- tion are accompanied by excessive noise, dust, dirt, smoke, noxious gases, odor, vibration, glare, heat or explosives shall not be permitted. These residual features shall be considered as excessive in the following cases:" (The section then goes on to set acceptable standards for the above matters.) , This section also states that the city council may require the owner or operator to make investigations and tests to show adherence to the perform- ance standards. I believe that the applicant should be made aware of the 1 performance standards and that he should consult with the city administration to make certain that the proposed use will meet these standards. The adminis- trative staff in reviewing the plans should pay particular attention to the � amount of noise or vibration that would be expected from this operation. Plans should then be devised so as to keep these items within the limits permitted. � � � ' I note in the minutes of the council meeting of January 18, 1971 that the applicant inquired of the city prior to buying the subject property as to whether his operation would be permitted. Representatives of the company discussed their business operation with thr-. city council and they were advised 3G -2- that said operation would be permitted on the subject property. I am certain that the applicant relied on this assurance in purchasing the property. I believe that the city should take the same position with the applicant at this time that it took at the time of the original inquiry; i.e. that is that the use is permitted subject to the city's performance standards. VCH/jlh 3H ' ' , �J r L � M E T A L +:�"kw?�s�*, M ed.+ .,�:ara.1�&i.�•. f � � >>! � � � .. :: � , � � ; . .tr.sR.3F�idkAWe�!aaT�t�f1i9:�k...a'w+v: i�� . C1�'AF TSMAN Ci �� �� �'ri�?��:,,y Frid�.���, c�iix�nadso�a �i' n Il i, �. �'`i � i]. " 3= . !, � � � /fl r , � � � � ���nuary 10, 1�}75 i<<•� T? ��:; ����:i�z:.�'acturi::� Ca�-s�:�rzf : e.��a�c'c�'��1,1y sub:�zi�� far �i0113� CJi��:�..''..8i'.'3.':::L:�;1 :li`it� 23�D1^t7?1:�7. cz �3.�Ui7rJ:i�l�. .fOi :r'�?Jl:tl.i.^..r?y va�^ �a�c� � ri �:� ��,�c��c an�i a���ica v i r�� �:�� b�til.d �,n� p��::��: � i; �o Aria`l7SJ �-,�:� :� �,�.�^por��i�xz �o ?�uilc: a rza�uf=uctu�.^ir,� �'aci? ity in t�:a C1_ ,;; of � xriul���e i3:�C? ?�,aY,,t�`ac�urin�, Compa:�z�r is �� ":3.n.~Y?���va �ox�norr����on �T? �7�c? pZ`:i.�'ta�'''� �� i?7 �'.'1? :iirll:c.�aC"t`,'.2I'3 �7i :'•t�E=Y:�'tt fY�`i�3 .'G :�Ic� �c'�? 3�1aL". �3 y :3 �;i�� � wT_1�c.9 £�Tlt.�. ;.;'u�:t�,y�ai ; :.t J:.7�i!il':.P' i'.'. � o Ui.12� :i�2'Zl.1C:"u"`� , in�7.u��e :�es�f;:�y �����,ne:-�:r�.i.n�, and ���3 ,i.41 f3:i� m�',�fi.��r in addi�in» r� T� a� o' t �-: i Zr �� �::3'2''30' 1� • Q S.I' 'J� � t�;l :?i'] to f.'a�` =LG�i�_::�?1. �, �7.T��� ?2��.�.,�' �.:_,� J� i.r,.. r T arr� '- �S ^).C:'8I"i £'.T2ii �i f!31'�jj 347. �?! � �1 '�:?.� r� ;1'."1� �.=:t� ;)t' � il(JL': C�l `3 �tll''t�'� T!;1' natur� :�:.iu�^.:�«�, Gu�^ V�4'vL �:IJ.VIl �LSZIV�-V�.�i� � rn4ni.ma�t ti:710�.�I1� of ' tru.�:� ;:�-���.*_'ia i�x�� n� Ci:'iLaLiiC7t� war'Yc 7A .;-�;,:r�g;;.. `�''t?:P.� CC�;?7s) :�il� E�Id3 � �.'�. �.�i2�P�. nTti G�C ��y):3S 28 �.�t� AriG� �•dt�� ' 'iTiC.OI'C%�::'.1."tit�.CC� 1'.?".'. '•3'..'' C;;".`- �..`��Ng a.i. £'�: �"',1'"!c3�uei� �z� lil �`�- C7 r Qi�X' OX`'�.�?? Cl`d� locati� ; ����:� ar, t�� `_�-�:� b�R�polls ?r�op n� ;��� ;�ou�h ?�'o�zr�h ��tr�ot. . s`.n ��;;� �aV o�:il': a 7_On�?�� s����r� �o:��s �j_at�t ��-� �.JO:) L�r�::��.e , Av�zl:�a ������he .�n 295:3 ��� ��ui�t=d our p.� a����, a1,0�0 squarP I'4Q'� iaci��.43 afi� 20:�0 i=ox �;n Fo�.���th ��r��uq �fi���.ne�volis, Uur �r�:�a?ic loc�a�i�n do�c� n�� p�Trn?�L ��ir�i��r ��,��:�.:�?or.s aricl �.n Elrli;.°ii )_j:3�-�.'LO;? L)� At��C1T'u �;:'n'auf^: %;� S!1O'.�,.l.C; �.�..�i:-C,' LO 1'g1flCf��i? On 1 ���i 4�b� e ac:r?a;,� in tha Cit� o�' �� id7.sy. ll � , ' LJ r Or_ ��earu:�?,� 5, 1�71 bs° p:-,„c�as�� 0�1 contrac� x"'or d:��c� l�.e96 �c3��s n� l: nd :in fs�� Ci��r oi F'?^�.dl�;,r. ti�ie: arQ �res�ntly in �he; ��r�ces:3 of p���^c�asin� ari�� �zer v�� .i� af' 1snc1 a�txt;t'�r_� this pr���r�;� :��ic`� wo�..ld bx�I�;, t;�,� t:.t��. ac��a��,a to 5.75. 'i�� ta�:�l p�r�:�; is bour.d�c� on �h� n�r�h by 1�i�s�issippi Str�e�, on t;�:.� ��re�� by ��e Burl�r�` ��n '���'�:hss�n `r;�il.way right of w�y, on th�-► so��t� '�y a 1i.23 ;50 �'��t; fra:� �'n3 north;�z n�o�zn�ar7 �.��? par�li.�t t;� i.�, ar_d on fi:�<: �ast �� t`:� pr�paa.y�ty Zinn of �rid�n;� Uur C��rr_ �i�r?wa»;� . We hop� Ua coY,17� 9'�:1 te�i� l�urch��e anc? setLl�� zh�: co :�cz��ct �o.r �sa:3 0;: o�r � r�;s� ntlg awned prap?rt:� bef'ot�a Jariuu?'�Y 31� 19'7�. • . 2010 NORThI FOURTH STREET :o MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55411, PHONE (612) 522-3344 e ���� �x�� t�;�ti�; �T�1y pl�}Zni�� �;� b:z� �.d:ii�� a !�.�y�UJ :.=s+��i.t�r� �.'J� �' ��c3.r.,� .f;:i t;�'1 C�?:::3';..�i'.�t:? :)':1 � .) :"lr.'�::. ; �:`1 t.f�° 8}:,s.t i:;�� :'ii.� �';,7^? ,'..E,.<.?.VC'�ii;.)�f'.�::.D':'1 iv?_;;?"I-L; i� I°?�1".':7;''?3. ��v�' iliA S`8L'.193''L.'�i.:.,'cl�. "t:�':�'�, �"IEs `f� 1 h 1 l rl ��.! � r�� ' t��'vte'^1.;' e;'� f���.�� U�� �t'.^..'�:3 ;3:�rc�+�l �� ���tv1�d °s�_r_ ;,-�_�:> r:.. � �;•�,� •.;.•, �S' C�.�.�J�.{'�.r:+ar��7"i �O: vh�� „;J`�.1'v J� t:ii8 ;:i��i?Z'�:��i• t`�'�% , > t?:i?Y.... ,..�.. � 3-,v «.�'a.:�iJ T':'•C'�;.I°:i't..i.)�ae� c+. V£�i'.'I.�:i'_'lv� :1.:1 ::��1�;�:)F�^.:.i .'J�1 vi"1� ?':;Jt'v�Q : -iC:=3 ^J.�' .s� �_ : ri 1' r � '�� :� t��.a �;��uL�_�'-� ....�-o-: i�:� ����-4�:�r� _1_�JU �.��� tc� 7� :.."���t,. _ �i� woa E'.i:�3�.^.�.3� Li3 �it3 .�..':'3C 1/ �'J.y �._�� vR �J.�,. �Ji'{ �.C1.�i.iZ� �7.4$�..f3a:.1:r% �.tl L±:s' C�: �ii;�.';' O:� '�,!1�� �t'1�Y�A��`-•j "+,��. �!?. '���.:_�'�ra �a'�.J�T1:3�.�Ji1- '�i,� I", i;t� u�:3 %:c;:iF`� j"�,1...'l.:.1iy .'r'.'J:I:?L.C".LC�i�.:Ji?y '.�a, ;d�.�.�. ''l.�ry g3'2�..0 �.0. �,�:"i�.it"3l��ia:r'. :i1'l;v v�.:�:..:�:�^:'J �,�1�u�v��L� t)'n. �Jl.... �JJ.���`....�v� ,��:.�..'Yt -�ty7 i �- rr,.. ti ; ;� �1 t'i s ..�I. .�. .,. �3.1'i.C, :7 :,',�. J _l _ x, ' :.i I = SC:I'��...a_C�� :��'1'.�^ �3Y�.�..-1�+3 'J.a>��?b^���,� ,r.`��T`�.�15; ��'t;�r :[''x1;�.',x'�1 E?:;���i3:? �t1 � 1i�..°. �:v>'� v.�.:.�' T� ��:ii`r..LJ'�1 O!� i�:'�'..''l � �..:Cl 'Yi.l �_�_` UG �i.LCaC14i� .L,:'�:il ���.r:iir . O�'t t:::'. _.� ^:�.X:3.3�.'�`�7.f. J�;�?'�i-�'; '.1C1!'.�i3�"'�;3::x'3:.�j r'�!:,r7 �i�:..!':!���:1:�, ir�iZ.ii; �j., ���I'�� A ij ✓,-J`1�� ld%�� J��i�� S� �.%i�'��b �� �'i�.)�i�..t �'i71.w?' �iw!.1. �d'T'�.}1��� CV��I.�J•il.l c7'� " . . • ' � . �'r'.1 £'.«-�.'..' ;J%.Z..ti.�;.IwL'? � L'3+1 1.,,. ^aY��.�I��� . 7� �:�.?� iij.�';P' t"1:t:� i'�i :�.i'<.LFi�'1'• !'t^��. }7. �.'t�f: 'i ' i � a r • {ri :'�. i i : �J tt _2 's� S .3 ":? i; � CJ x �.` 1 i�. s., .' �? � ;;3 rt� + � o �: ��. :�. ��; ::� �. � :� :� � � � � �;r � c :� & Zlt� � 3 t; �➢.:. J::�2'v i: �• ' �'ip �C10eJ.9 u!1:�L-.O'.�s° '�x'O,Aj�?C�:1.J73�S Cl��i. W�'u�l �l'JLI�� cA���1'pL���.� ' . 3 �' t{ �! � Cs 3 C�1"i �' Lt �. �. jr �`J_'l_; i:�_ �. i z f � , //� . ,. � , ,. � f //// /, . . � � � ' ,%f ./i�f � ��'.r �-' �� / �,�1`���f, � .. � t..�-� . t__ .� .���__. R�c����d A. Q1.�en, b��:�-�-����id:�:�t R �t� F�i�p��Z�actu, i.n�, �:�:n�:�:�y �. e i � � . c+n i�i �i :v -ti�- •' �o 'T'w . .. '� '7 � � ` \ �� � ! k � I . •• � �b.j / � .1 w Y� . ,. � �'• -a.��_ 'I i � � �___.��:__.__. L' e lI « �' •Q � ^ a ,�' /tl�� ^ ',° A e •1%l�r•y. y� � ; � J:�..�r t 'T � 9 ,;.t;;.,ol,y �r ' w•S�r" ,, ,� ,n y�� �;l'�"\♦ r a.. /�f r• t i�s.� S. , �• � * .' a• r `I�`, f .� � � �A�i "i-��- r..7: .�� l- ') � '�� ,� � A �u ('^� ql �. ; � � f / } �� �n°A M A � pr ..i, �i'N Y.� /� {:� �+l , .. S° . ��. r. .. �� S '��1." � � , �� ri i� �0 • ., i N ' , .•,,.• �o iY� ,. ;,, .,' '',/�' ,f � � � . c i.. ,,.�,� , }�:'''�� t ' � ii.�� !If.,�1 wo.;: Q ��� pn p ewOQ �I. S�� . q^ ^�.� . 1� 1 $. � � .nif�r�i ° . Ky �� _ �� � '4.`�., ;:,.•ti ,� � . � �,. �,_ � L �. 1tr��r iri. , , . ",y .. . �. . .�,,.��1 1�,.�' � +� �i.- � �, , ;;�....S;i" ,'. ' � ° 60 ' ��,..,.� ,�,,-�2�. :�r .s.c .� .� , �� � 3 � � �� .1LA � '., `, 0 2 � f.� 1 �t �`y �7 0. � � - a e � `.._' . ;:, . b u�-; •� �n�.. _.i / �� . ,, ;� :q ;I� d 7 :,o ', �- . . . ..�...�{.tJ.i ti �l.J;!'�1 ` iyT�I».- �� \; � \; ��� � � ^;T �� . �. "K� 'f�CiJ' ��, q �. � ° t �t i 1% 1� ! �C' ' . 3ri�Nw� �►� a 3G'� �;�{O / � � --��� rrs -� �5'�a �� � / i ,S .o.. "L__ . � W Sfl.i2 �eTa� . � .�..i r � � r '/J�.., , o• "T ; /�' n A ' . � 7 � �� y ''t I �` ip � � • , . . � � � { _"� o�o. t �,r1�_ % !� .,. . . 1 OA #Z4-05 RAO MFG . CO . � . .. f^! -' _ Jt�'&'K '�O . �PVtca-Q ;^ 'I✓ y, �. � . , . w . 1! ' � q p .. K. '' '- �"? r'J�,dJ� • � %oa !v . . � � ('�, �. Y.. , � ,� (f�, »` � " � • '/25i•Ob� ' � s i . o . � ;I . [`"� �' ,,,----- a �% ;�y �B � � �� � � �``' jl+:Y -�'`�./ , ..�_ �J.. ,. . ... L. ;en ^ . II • � _� M.6.4c?t �� / � -- —i � (?!-ZS� ,a ». ., " '� �r a• 5. � i' � / � : �``a. � �S �r i i � �a �,yi� � ,t � . : /.] � / � ___«�.___L T 1 ��^^ /!. fi �.�i I :� � F . ♦ /' f ,, � � �� _ � s , �2� taJ /o . ,•.• r � '� 1 �7C(S !S ry n, Il'O Oo' I � ' - ! � .t T _ � ]/ ti � - �1 _ lf. t. � � •-- � � x ; S�°'Sf..' .� ._F.�,_ �,_ II f,__T�„ /E � �\ �` ! � b Y,:iz'; ,iJ - '%(7,� �C. .L '_` 4 �� . .s � -L__ �--� � r''�' � ` �') _�„� � , , ,..;�:,- � - I f �� ^ �f.,> >S ; , ` i ,. �t� 9 1Y ` /K i �I 19! i6 15 !�r r7 r.: e(f'� /,7�,��� � ti ,C :�4,ti� � \ .'aiSM'�� j m-,y1.�i i7c .�'. I�G f'� 60 .v^.�" � + � ' F.r;s F.^e',� . �O K'•M j � -- '� . � i �. i . � ' . ^: � �� - - — - � ' B!2 9z M o°' y � � . . , 1� � i. •i —+ . .._«_._.. ' -- -,n<is- -:- . . w "B� -_ ^_ :" _'_iYt7:��T�:,rit'i'i'� i�r�a . ---- — �� �� e � �- ~� ��� •�• �," s,�s � rr� : -, -,�,�.,�_O���r����n���ee�� � .._ �,. � . �i ; . . ' : � -�' , ' ; j � , i � , � �' i I w <<;'e9�8 7 G 5�413 Z/�_<':i j%^�'�c����i°�5���-'.� : � � s. i' ' �..� ,_' ` � , I . C j i ' f i I -I" ° � F . � � ., =r'• 1::,=�� .. . .. k� z, �� , i ' i . : � � 3 `� " �� A ri-i . ,' ; 1 ,_r,.f`.� o,,', . �' � ,;--- _ t ,�„ i_ , -a-�--,, `-� � , e � . �� , . /3..> a � �.�o ♦ ' {. i T'tb ni•--_. s � � � 1 �.'� �� . • � .��, T� �'Z = i % ��� P, �y,l ,- \ 31 ` = . .. . . .: -;r_s.4 � ,��, ._ '_'/�' ' / f _"'_' ' �� � � ' �� - � � �� � . - � �}��� �! � �_.. 'O i ° �' �1 `? . 1 ?�' ° ,; � M . I / ' •'�, { .r i 1 � _ . �,,J ` -� J , � t � - �' � � 1� /� ,�r, .��� r+' �Tti- � / -� �. j� � �a I j ;a3 � � ,� , � . Lj � L�.i . ��� ti �sp'..��'I�f+►-�'r'_w?..._i=? i: � y �V .'��* ��� � -.� -�c;, r.� ;� ;ti3 =' : �>`� .; ,Gl ,° � �; x «� �i; � ,t r _ ° j , i _' _' _. "_. '. ._ '. a � •.s\ •.� � �� � � •- ��1 � i� �� :O ��� �ti� �t °Y _ ''� �ol c � 1 `R �, �� ' � ---_ .. ��.- � ,'_'-,°��i�rn�;���a�p���,rjie�, � ; � %�t� � � ;�� , �.7:. ��' j N ' � ; r •_ _. ._i ' J�� .� Q T� ' . �� ` � a ��- r-j�� % zsl: ..�i �'�� ��`' �, g, ,�, _ _ ;: i , � � �� �,, � �?--� , .. --- . 4 �- . �swr y+�� �,� ��.. ( �~. z�_ � / `� / _'�'�" JNi~y�__h ___ __ � ... 1♦ 'VJ..• 11 � � Y �r 7 � . i i � __ ... _. ..' ' . _ � i � l � � � ` Sr . 1 f ': "� ---�n •— `-- � �,�� � � � ':�, �..', ' � � ' -� '�'�;i �w�± .'". i -' t� ; �, ,._. � ' ✓�.' ' � � ,�/ . `>i.., . r "° i!�� r•mrf,.�.;� y'} `�.. f � , / ' � o' ^ � . ` V ^ �1 aJ�J1_ (+1�7 . �I I?.f.tf � SJw.�+e� r�:.+ r � y��1 � � !; :• . - ' 1 ����T:. ':;.:... . .,, �- �w.C�.1 �� Li ! �;:. - '_:`,_ ', . ., . . �� .,•>/ / 9+.h , � • 'j'� , d � .• :iS.f�� �,� • � � i �. • �� �t., ...y.� f:. �. r� �.� j - �i :� .''' rw ?-^. . %° " ri ,�.. � .••4m_� _ 7 , - �' -.-.. LC ei 'i� � _ .. � r.� 1. G0�'' �s %�/, .Nft^� .H ,:� . ' ; i '��•� _ . "1"""} ,. ra�v� . , � ••.al� � �. 2 � '� �: `' � �f A : J �� �t/'•• �� ��� c� � � ,i ;� : � ''� � 1 , +,•ii �� �.� ,•• ''a'' ` �' J�.vu Y ) I s� � U —��t ..'.'. O ` ,� `� � I' �>> a : ,1t., Y C �/ N.,r� ' � � a�;'.{! t:, 1•�:J oa I",.• / > 4J � J '-� �p ��-. . 1 ' ' ,' �\ _ r, ; y\, ' iJ r ./ . r1� ; � 1 i .r� i1 ! ��. • � � ,~ •, � i � � '• -` �,,, :��, i :'�,,' _! �� � �I;� "'! ---.- _ ,�,: .� , +� : ± � \ � _• , n •y A � . '� � �; •'a /f ! *' i= �i . i .c � 9� � � J��'; �' � H � 1 � ..i �� � \ ` ,- ,� .. � � oil�� --- ` � --- :�. . � ` j � • . A� •Q�'�� � ,%,-_ . '"/..;.Y t�•,• . -�. � � � ---".�• � 1 �:.. .v� r' � � 1 � � s.'� �• . - „�� `-�; ... �i�� �y'.• � ' , 8 ,,�/a'-�^• ��� �) .*YY � ' o � �� '�''� � SY�_��:�►���11i � LA�iE ;' :.�� �, ",,,.., 1�T,1,,�.�. -.. p I hl •� � s P • s r ' i' '�' ..�..n � . , . � V.:.0 �'�' ., er • :� • ,, / � a �� - ' �- j : ' ",.�'�fi-� / � ` � I I ' l ' ... ._..._ � . ,, . + " l � . ( �. V (� ',�� • � : _ '�1" � ; ��t• ;� � �� ' o ,.� � '' ,� ° � � ;I r• �Y"' . ; ' i i � ���. " '` =� � ,/ / ;' � >: 1 C • � � � . i + � � •� � , 1 �'' �`•_ , , � `l�' � ' t., � '— .�� �. .�. ' �: . N.,• :' ; , �� � � �,`�♦ ' r�a.�� q a� S � � 1ti...�� ��-� �;� � , -.' .'.•,� < r'� . , : , 1 ' 'r � • ,\y� �' � , ' ' ^ , .• `� ! V � � � � � � f,+i� •(]� '.f � ' \ ° � i :: �S ti 1I : ! ! :1 r :� � a � 1 � '�� / e . � C� "• � i � ' �a t J', •.» ��,, ' � � � k 1�, r o�.s . �. �i� N o� — ��� � % J,r/r � �f��i�i/�%%rf/ri�.�/ri�i�`�f/.%J''il/Yl'/1`✓�/ff;�Tr��»i�j/!./. �_�T, � �� � -� imnumrnunc�urw�nnccanr u�uu: o„ 3 a� � � t� � � :,� � � � ��V• • r � "` .'� > �.i �-�' C' t, LOCKE� . _ ... , ; U0 '� � � �� � � + " x . _'"� VD 5 ,� -- / �' �o �..��i� s... i /'Dd��" yr,i'�.,;���fi�,i��m��ia,�.�.... .. "� A �1 � �'t f �� � N°� /,. . , =,f, - ? f/ � --�OA #74-05 RAO MFG. COMPANY . -- i�Hl SCOUTS .'* 4 I� �, ' y`�\�'� X� � zo� �r . yyy CAMP lOCK9lEA yt��i/ r ♦ \p i P � � /� � �/.� ��� .. . �• ,��' . , ' ' ., . - . V .. � '. i . '". � .. eQ�rj `I � y�� I �iF - ll��� .. , � � �l' � . i -T—rT . �. i� ' � , y r �. � ,� • . ��� . . .�. ,� i i 5 � �.. '� �� �f�i, ,�1,,.. - `_ sr s J' � � �� , �R � �' cx �_ _? :, � = z � � , T S � 6i9 B �. . e • I �� � � � .�.. 1939 Ri � �� �ii�p� o�. ' .HOL�IpAY ,���' 3, P�Gr� + �- 4. :l' e �. ��,� � ��R. 3 ! . . . O . Gs�TMCII'g j vP��'. � • y� � ' L ] �S s6 ��• '4���� �� '�: t � ., ��� - �' Nv�� ?�. - B eI5 " 9 � � ,�'� � ..i. j ,i i i� ¢� . � , � � I , p'j0 Q�� � F •... . � ?- � �, � =-•; ��, � �! � y; `��ti . �7 ��'� �b Iti � . !�, \: �' (nCa O •' S C'' `^ - �� '' � C . ' �T V S � � • •'�� � 4 Sp. 9 11 . I � � �1 �a yl(/ddF ��� .;� � '� r R t � I� � t '! ♦ . J �t q� .{ rH R. � ^ �4'Nfr�11N) ' � ��y _._` .i� �V S ' � .� � ,i.r . � p ,� c .. c3 r . - ' -{�. . . � „ �/L� . . „ I c�" � : l„ �",. � r 7EV • � � ���J�§ � ,�{'" �f�'(� - _ 1.. ( " �, R ' � � . � ' ' � c�- /��� �r � �j�'_ � r� " h ` — u`c' sue9 -to .t���'`C._' y ,�_� ' �.. � e�v' s �� .l�( «. � �e. vo �.�- ¢�G � � � ��1 I. ���� '�' � ���� ;',; ' K � y �� ' ,�: � „�ql/,C,� � , ��',�' +' «� ��"'"�o.. � t � ,69',t�/��� c6 , A�����;� � serH �vc ue � . - � a.�d i,i��,�i -- . ��� \� ,r...', � 'wt �nN iw P� 2 , 1 4. J ��'�.��%, �j � �,r g\\\�l*��.. . ,�",R��S"� ��i�L ���' . HAYES� �.;t �6 i� r EC£MENTARY � �� � ��- �H r�e►� ��:�A� afi'l�,E QRE£K TERRA -�ACiq7��/� S��+ooi t.oisr ra� -.�p Y � C..,. %�� 5r 45Si551ii1 W�Y � YISSISSV>i, STR4ET ' � � . ` ... t V : S�0 '� ' �� t{�n _ '::.. 101 !�� ' t .o' µ M 1� '�� r. '� � �J d� � � �� ���� ..i,�.,. 1 , � ,�N 'L4/ T `y \ C�u',%�'• j ,t. — 4 ! - :. .' �;s��,'';��1,'; r,�' ��REEtS.rG,�.� r �`f� � � ?, �, Q.�, C ' j' n �'P 4�1 , � �" �_ , ,,,, F ;� ,5 ' r�! — 'J'- <rn� ,,,,,, � � e n — ' i Sf 64 TH W4 — ( 4TFL ' 1 .,q f • .+ ;; L�. I �� t ��1 'S'� f � N r ! � • � Ij I 4,` . . , , w � o ( �'�1 � `\_� eF��, � . / I 1 K ' .J,��i 631i NAY � , RiVE \\� \ �� / f � . �' Y�to JI' � , �� � J � 1 ' \ ISB � ' vl, R. WPY j� �RI,�-.� I v J�ft�`i•� •b ) ' � _ `}( Y1 \ �. c. `^ ,. ,.� ' �, � v . . � � �: p�". q _ � 'j � � � � � E'- �' C �^. � n,� � �' 4r � � � r� � , �>i-. � , _ �' C � �;` ` '' y� ,1Panio ro,N�� ' � � , � c� � C, �` �t'; V C�: � i p�("�� L � � : ,. T; , ,^ � c `� ' t �c � ��v E' C k. .�: Z'� �' FNID�EY ( voras st u�.{ L; ., E� �� �. , c� [, j. . 4aC `�. ' a O,4v'�5 6 qDOmb r i� n . . C• ! �• t:•' i `�✓ Jii MIGM � CNOpu{,, � •. :�, � � / - . i�i :� VARK. � � � I�' f'�� �„ r�.� �.� `,� �"�. 1-�� , � '/ � f� — <� C� ?� t� \� Ct,,, fl �^ �. DISTRICT 14�L1_/� ) M��" ' .. � . , _ •- �/ ; - :E. H " �~FRIDLEY 3.��c �I(,in !� A� r i" `' ; ' I • °� � � � �. 0. 5 �1'} 1�,,. ^ 1 l � � ( � r( i7 ., i � �6 � .��' I � { � ' ,i GOMMONS -� �Q i� �'; � � �,. � { � � 7,,� lJ J$U. . ' '1�E � �1, 1 �, ,;, . .-, �> rti o0 g � -1 i .GY'Y:Y ��r � ., � . � � � _ � � = ,.l _ . �9��j1Tf AfD— � ) . . . � � � j i� ' � � � � r% C� // �x � �- PaFKVIEW � : �' .��: � FRIOLEY ^i � .� J uL- .ROBT LOUIS '' � Y � 1 � ., � {Et. - . � �'.�<,_�� S ;:..J - �w �... , i�� �^'STLYENSON�; ,,� �� k ' `sy �f ��� ;' ,SR!� H � SCHjO � ' `�' ELE SCH, �� a� �` �! � �WS�'T �.�4 a � .� � a. � t� � f .�� w� � �?�„. � �' �' �il � � / i'•' '�� ' � � v � � j F ', J �• � (:.�• q:o � � � ., f��G � _ ' ' � � �' j � . "�1lDIST i� 1'" �.' ���� ('. � h � 1 � ij � ��-n �{ '�:.>� `� ;;i � ;1�i�, � !') �'> �- rlJ :q .. ^��.y�= ��/ �� �' ��� � : � .:� <,� , � � r -� � ,� .,:� � ' � �;: „ ,�'y 2 f` '`\ ,; � .; � J •, � � :•, + � Q � "o ?�' f � I � ,� ;:° - ' � � :� �.� •9 3� �> : ;,� r3 v - �.I � � " ItS� ",.q � � I� /f 4 � � M'� �, � '� � �;' v��� //f . '.�. �} \ 4 Jq '� i "f ��� � � 3 J :� �, �' �. � �' �, i �'-' wA # r i ` -: % i l,$ L A E.�a f A� � � , �� `F� ; � .� �. i � � ) t r� �;; �? i•:,: t ' E � p! � Tn 4v `• N!. .. � ��Y41G1 .� � �J// �/fJ�� -.�����, V � � ]V NF Sq,H• e n / � Y - . . � � \�'y �� r� rr�52� \C' F W . ,�! � � "� �\� � �" �F r � � _ �J '4� . \i-. V. ' � �/, � 4� � R _ .F� � iuO�D'��'�RNG EO••t i�Jf/.r� ��f/J' ry� �'� � /� ' %l �'� e. J /j� � /. . W � ,�' � � � f � f � � !� ' �c.' 4 '. �� "; �, s , r i A A : � � /,�f�� CJ�� :� � - � C� , :, � ; > s rr, r �. J. . _ � • f . . �]1�\1�� �1117 ��� �. 'R' � t • .,¢ S_. R . :�. � � � _ � °P � - , ,`,"`" :� :� %� \� -�n, ��`�.��.J '' j�.�j��,����.rF ������j�I�������� i. e- . . ' ,���; i � . � � � ��� �,��ii� A1.1N ��` 111LL61 LL.�111.uLll_=" � • 1 .�,/� �_ � �J� ' tl .r � ..... . . . . . �„� . . �� ;��� f//l�' . � : e� ,!/ ��1�. / �� � � ,� o�, � � �� ��'^ .' �v . ��. �_ . � ,. .t�, ,un� ��� .�� y ,�';.. �` , ,� �. -� . ; ; ; . :....� ,� � , �� � t - : ._. . .�., ._..�.�-_: .��:�-�_ __ __. ___ _ __ _. ��� 0 I , � � Q��o���A4veaoi�� , � � � �� IN7ERS7q7E 469q q ����. , .� � ... ��,� :� �— � - ..� ,� r` �.�. . . . . . . . ___.. ... . . .+..yY�. ... � � : .�. ��.� � � a� Y,+ ,�..�. ': i ,•�� . ', , .. .., • _ � ' � � �. . �._ = .. � .. N . � , K ,. ,. �,�,-, � � 1� .: ,��, , _-� � �� �� � - � . - --- . � 1 . ..r_,___ __ _ _r._ ; ... _ .. . . • , . ; ._� �_-�_r—aw�..__. `1 '� : . 1 � __, _...- w_ —��r � ' . k� o�e� �: , .`�;� . , 3� � - � �� �� ` ., J '�� � . .��. • ' . '��+I . .��. , . ���r.�� '� � ,; -��, � � � . � .�-'�!' r—� _,.� � � T _' .� __ :^ ' , ' , ; f � �''�-,....^ J � � , i F _ . __ _ . � Z OA # 7 4 — 0 5 _�- - � � ',.::� • ` `• .�• `�- � � �,` . � ` RAO Mf g . Com an . ,_ ;, _ � „ . �� , . P Y \�� � . . . : ,-_'_". . . • . ' , . . , � � : .i����� " "� � , . — � . R'cs. . CI • , . i � •.J •-t � . . - , , it' ,�) �' . , ' _ / . �' ` � �' ` 1 I . . � � � � � . � __ �;,-�� ��� ; �� ;� �, .� � ,: . /; ° c�� . 1 . : . I , . __ � .o _ ,. . � � �i� :` . . ; .. ' '" �� M � '�. '�. I. '� . � `� � � � J� ; -- - - �_� � � �,� � .� � � - . �. . . :. ; �. �_ t.; , . . , �._ --� ., . � �;,. _y_ � -__,.._. , ,_ , � : . . � � . �--'�. � � ' W� . . . i . � v ; Z f ` . .' 4 f ' � .�' � � . ��.�_. II � :. �� - � f ' , –�y - -- � --°– , �... � ,� ; i W � � � .. , ,..._ ._.. _ 'y_ i _ _ _ -I - a; , .� „ �. . •I _ ':\ \, ,� � ,?; , . . � � w;. `��` ;... . . . � . . 3, • � t � 1 ' W �. , ;, , ' I I ..q �� ' ,I � . . � � � � �, .. W --• —i � � 2 � � ' J � � � , . '. ' ,v�j -- . . � + 1 . • . Q �:.__ . •�.:_ o #,: � o �._. = . . _ � i � i `, . ` - - ] ', }; � W W � �� �� � : : � � � �. ,� � i � - � �, , h� . � I � '. - � � � � ",�� `�, ", _ . � I !1. "t ^t ' .i i ��'�- i � . .�i` �. � y :� ; \,'� r ' t" � ( � •I ' �. �\ . � � • . � �: ( • � , ''•"'� . .., �� � _ ^ � • r � t: �. l� , �+ + ,.. ( � . � : �� .. • .� �r' , I . 1 I, � . • ,�' : �. ' �. ; r � . . � �:_ � : , : � ' � . ;, n ��, i _ . N _ . , {� , . 7� � � . •+ . Y � � ��, � i �,�\'. ; : • ` , i " ,' � �i �\ -` —; {__._.._.,..�.� � � - - , _ � • � ' ^ , -, l _ �"'` \—�,--�-_..__ _ - ,r- ---- - ,- ,: ` ,.c�. ._ .. . . . ..� �-----�� � �- . _- �......�_ , , . _ ,,.__.._ � .A•4 • . . .. ^ f' y 4. � .1, rr.` .. s• . �� � � . . 1 . '• + j •il� . . �. � '����'���'.�=��_���`�-`1` , . t S� •'/'�1�1 "'» >-'"''.. i i `��.��„'�`.�- . � � S il _— _ ��...�,�.. •� . � ...� .�. ' . � � _____----T� 'Jb•y..[ MJ��iilycn� ---._-.__-----r�.�.� �at ' • ' �-. ," .- .�...-_� - __ - _ _ _ ` ,YO.1;)Ml�yf79 • '_-- =_:���' , • �'-,---.-�_ �_ •��. , • . � . '1 , , , , ` ' , � __l `,; � \\ � l ; . � . � �. � � � � � � ' � � 4 CITX OF FRIDLEY ' ANOKA COUN�'Y, MINNESO`TA NOTICE OF HEARING Ok ASSESSrIENT �OR ST. 1974-1 STREET TMP120VFMENT PROJECT Norice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Friciley will meefi at the C:ity iiall :in said City on the 1�t� day of March , 1975, at 7:30 o�clock P.M., to hear and pass upon all objections, :i.f any, to the pro- posed assessments in respect to the following improvement., to-wit; . ST. 1974-1 STREET IriPROV�MENT PROJECT The proposed assessment roll for each of said improvemezits is now.ori file and open to public inspection by all persons interested, in the office of the Clerk' of said City. . . At said hearing the Council will conszder written or oral objections �o the proposed assessments for each of said iniprovements. . � The general nature of the improyements and each of them is the construction of street improvements inc].uding grading, stabiL-i.zed base, bituminous surfacing, concrete curb and gutter, incidental storm sewer systems, water and sanitary sewer services, sidewalks, and other facilities located as follows: Squire Drive: Rice.Creek Road to Mississippi Street Dana Court: Squire Ar:ive East ta Cul-de-sac � �. ' Camelot Lane: Arthur Street to the �ast . � 732 Avenue: Highway No. 65 East Service Road to Central Avenue Bacon Drive; Onondaga Street to 75th Avenue Sunra.se Drive: 61st Avenue to TH No. 47 Serviee Road Rainbow Arive: Jupiter Dx'ive to T�I No. 47 Service �oad. �� Arthur Street: Camelot Lane to Mississippi Street 5th Street: 63rd Avenue �0 64t1i Avenue 6`�th Avenue: Rice Creelc Tezrace to 7th Str.eet 7th Street: 67th Avenue t� 68th Avenue �' McKinley Street: 75th Avenue tQ Lakeside Road 78th Aven�i�;. Approximately 140 Feet tdest af Beech Street to Burlington- Northf- - rl Raa,lway R/0/�J � � - Alley: 7�,�_h Avenue to 79th Avenue between riain Street and E1m Street � The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of ttiem is a11 that land benefited by said improvements or each of them and lying witha.n the general. area above noted. � ' r r Said improvements wi11 Ue assessed a�ainst the properties within the ��Uove notecl areas in whole or in part proportionately to each of the lands there�in canta�ned according to the benefits received. A properGy o�oner may appeal an assessnen� to the district cour� by serving nat'ice of appeal upon the City Piayor or Clerlc within twenty (20) days after � � , , , . . . .� � 4A Page 2 , j� Notice of IIearing of Assessrnent for S'�. 1974-1 Street Improvement Pro�ecr acloption of fihe assessment and filing such notice with the district court � within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or C1erk. � DAT�D THIS lOth nAY OF February , 1975, BY ORUER O1� TI�L' ' CITX COUNC'tL OF THI; CITY OT' r1ZTDLEY. ' , . . � . . MA.YOkZ William J. Nee . ATT�ST: � . : ; - � . ' . '- � . _ .. . . - �'�: CITY CLERK Marvin C. Brunsell � - � Publish: Fridley Sun on February 26 and March 5, 1975. -� � : . '. � � � . . . . • , � � . ' . , ' , : 1 . . � t. � � �. � - .. . : � 1 . . Y. � � . . . I � . • . , 1 . . . , ' ' ' MEMO T0: NASIM QURESHI, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MARVIN C. BRUNSELL, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE ST. 1974-1 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DATE: MARCH 3, 1975 On the attached.pages you wi11 find the finaZ assessment roll for the ST. 1974-1 Street Improvement Project. A summary of the costs follows: SOUIRE DRIVE, DANA COURT, CAMELOT LANE, AND ARTHUR STREET Curbing has not yet been installed on the west side of Arthur Street and on a short portion of Camelot Lane. When this curbing is installed, it will be assessed to the benefited properties. The front foot assessment rate includin� curbing is $11.05 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate including curbing is $1.58 per foot. The front foot assessment rate without curbing is $6.05 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate without curbing is $.92 per foot. 73� AVENUE The front foot assessment rate is $14.02 per foot. BACON DRIVE The front ioot assessment rate is $15.53 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $2.85 per foot. One water service was put in with a cost of $310.40, and one sewer service with a cost of $329.40. Maintenance work to loop the watermain on Bacon Drive was done, but this cost is to be paid from the Utility Fund and not assessed to the property owners. SUNRISE DRIVE AND RAINBOW DRIVE The front foot assessment rate is $8.49 per foot. i 1 4B 4 'C Page 2, Memorandum to City Manager and City Council ST. 1974-1 Street Improvement Project, February 28, 1975 STH STREET The front foot assessment rate is $15.40 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $5.30 per foot. 68TH AVENUE AND 7TH STREET (67TH AVENUE TO 68TH AVENUE We have prepared an original and an alternate roll for the assessment of these streets. (7th Street between Mississippi Street and 67th Avenue is in the ST. 1974-2 Street Improvement Project as this is a State Aid street.) Original Roll The front foot assessment rate is $12.91 per front foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $2.36 per foot. Alternate Roll This roll also includes a side-street assessment for lots on the north side of Rice Creek Terrace. The front foot assessment rate�is $12.91 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $1.30 per foot. MCKINLEY STREET The front foot assessment rate is $14.80 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $2.36 per foot. 78TH AVENUE The front foot assessment rate is $40.68 per foot. ALLEY (BETT�TE�N MAIN AND ELM STREETS) The front foot assessment rate is $6.88 per foot. ' I � r � � CITY OF FRIDLFY ANOICA COUNTY, MINrIESUTA NOTICE OF tiEARING OF ASSESSri�NT FOR ST. 197[�-2 STR��T IMPROV�MENT PROJECT Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City vf Fridley will meeC at the City Hall in said City on the J�Q�-h day of March , 1975, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., to hear and pass upon all objections, if any, to the pro- posed assessments in respect to the following improvement, to-�ait: ST. 197�i-2 STREET IrIPROV�i�1�NT PROJECT The proposed assessment roll for each of said improvements is now on file and open to public inspection by all persons interested, in the office of the Clerk of said City. � � At said hearing tt.:: Council will consider writt�.n or oral object�ons to Che proposed assessments for each of said improvements. The general nature of the improvements and each of them is the construction a� street improvements including grading, stabilized base, bituminous surfacing, concrete curb and gutter, incic�ental storm sewer systems, water and sanitary sewer services, sidewalks, and other facilities located as follows: 79th Avenue: Approximately 140 Feet West of Beech Street to Burlington- ' Northern Railway R/0/W (riSAS) . '• 7th Street: Mississippi Street to 67th Avenue (MSAS) 1 The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements and each of them is all that land benefited by said improvements or each of them and lying within the general area above noted. . ' , , � � � , I__.1 Said improvements will be assessed against the properties within the above noted areas in whole or in par� proportionately to each of the lands therein contained according to the benefits received. : A property owner may appeal an assessment to the district court by serving notice of appeal upon the City Mayor or Clericcvithin twenty (20) days after adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the district court within ten (10) days after service upon the Mayor or Clerk. . DATED TI1ZS lOth DAY OF February , 1975, BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF Tt�E CITY OF FRIDLEY. � � . . . 0 ATTEST: CITY CLERK riarvin C. Brunsell r�nYOx 1 Publish: Fridley Sun on February 26 and March 5, 1975. William J. Nee m 5 , , MEMO T0: NASIM QURESHI, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MARVIN BRUNSELL, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR THE ST. 1974-2 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (MSAS) DATE: MARCH 3, 1975 The ST. 1974-2 Street Improvement Project involves the improvement of the State Aid streets shown below. The full cost of these streets is not being assessed in the residential areas. The assessment is based on what it would have cost to put a typical residential street in the areas in question. The full cost of the streets is being assessed to commercial property. A detailed explanation of the streets involved �ollows: 7TH STREET: MISSISSIPPI STREET T0 67TH AVENUE Original Roll On this assessment roll the side footage to be spread extends all the way to University Avenue on Mississippi Street and on the south side of 66th Avenue, and extends one-hal.f way down the block on the north side of 66th Avenue and the south side of 67th Avenue, on the west side of 7th Street. The total cost of the street is $35,700.80, and $16,658.82 would be paid from State Aid Funds for the residential area. The front foot assessment rate for commercial property is $28.12 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $3.75 per foot for commercial property. The front foot assessment rate for residential property is $12.91 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $1.72 per foot for residential property. Alternate Roll On this assessment roll the side footage to be spread extends all the way to University Avenue on Mississippi Street, both sides of 66th Avenue, and the south side of 67th Avenue on west side of 7th Street. The total cost of the street is $35,700.80, and $16,846.04 would be paid from State Aid Funds for the residential area. The front foot assessment rate for commercial property is $28.12 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $3.11 per foot for commercial property. The front foot assessment rate for residential property is $12.91 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $1.43 per foot for residential property. 5A Page 2, Memorandum to City Manager and City Council ST. 1974-2 Street Improvement Project, March 3, 1975 79TH AVENUE (APPROXIMATELY 140 FEET WEST OF BEECH STREET TO BURLINGTON- NORTHERN RLIILWAY RIGHT/OF/WAY) Al1 of the property fronting on the street is commercial property which is assessed at full cost. The front foot assessment rate is $31.88 per foot. �i � � ' � � ' r � � � ' � , � I , ' ' � ' P�a..rch 3, 1 j"j5 Cit,y Council of the Cit�T of r'ridley 6�31 ilniversii;y �lvenl�e Ni: F'ridle,y, f�iN 5��32 SIiRJI,C`l': }'roposed asses �ment for ST1y74-2 Street lr��rovenent I'roject 7t}� Street r�ississip;:i Street �0 6'jth Avenue (�TSAS� Plea.se corisider thi.s vrritten objection t;o the proposed assessments on I,ot q�loc'_{ 4 Rice Cre�k. '1'errace Plot ?_ ��t the meetin€; to be held on t`�e 1Uth daJ c{' t:Ta.rch, 1975. I und��rsta.nd the assessement: are on �;he 1%asi.s of �,11 land benefited by said imnrover�en'�s. `l'his is vrhere I cannot ���;rc�e �is to �ah�r yc�iz f'eel I have henef:ited b,y thi.s �i;�eet T_mprovF�rnent Project. In fz.ct, it has crea,ted the oppos:ite ef'f'ect b�y� detr�.ctin�; and deval�zirig m�� property wi+,h the a.ddition�.l tral'f'i_c a.�id noise pollution ��1,_is the r.�.r�.rci of. it al.l. a 6hth Aven�.ie did no �:il�rra�rs have the thru stop si�;ns Y�eiorP c�nteri.ng 'jt1� Street. ' Tdo�N I want to �;�o back a fe��� ye�:rs to try to sbow w�ho really has bE.nefited ��azd v�iho s?�ould be re:sr_�onsible for• the cost of t�i� Street Tmprovement 1'ro�ect. r'i.rst it v�as �� Special. LTse Yermit to allov� the constructi.on of the rlti.ldinE which �.o�ise� the Red O�vl Store at t�issi�sippi a.nd liniversit}r Avenue. `1`his meant closin�; th� service roa.d �.l�n�; IJnivex�sit,y Avenue between r!lississip:.�i S�txeet �nd 66tti Avenue wittii the plan t,o �iivert thi � tre�fi ic to ?tY� Street. '1.'his is also when the Cit,y Council felt so stront�l;T in favor of this pro ject tha.t ti sa.w fi.t to rc.surface `jth Street from rYTississi���i Street to b"jth Aveni.ie r�,nd to pay for it out of the General I'�lnd. This wa.s not ri�,ht either �vhen it wF�,s done t'or. tre benefit of I�riv�,te erlter��ri�P. Rut, it wr�s �jtist a] ittle h�ttE r'th�.ri to asses�- :�.d,jacent re:, ident properties d� rectl,y. Ne:ct in order is this ��resent ST19 (t}-2 Street Impruv�ment ?'ro;ject. `�he r�al rea�on w�.s not th�.t the acljacent City �ouncil of the (;ity of Fridley March 3, 1y75 resident proper.ties wanted the street ir��roved nor was it nec�ded at t!�i �+.i: P but it wa5 required to be torn u,� in order to provide setil�er scrvi.ce for the proposed a,P�.rtr�ent develo�:ment of the former xeidel property located south of' t�iis,si5si�;pi Stre�t and wes� of 7th Str�et. klso, after iri�ui7�irirg- wh,y the e�tst o.f' 7th 5treet bet�vF�en r�iississip�i Stxeet and F>6th Avent�� is Nrider i;han bet�een 66th Auen�ae a.nd 67th ,�vemae, I l�arned th�t this was to nrovide for str�et ;.>arking f'or The Church of Christ. There a.re no t�enefits to rny ��rop�rt}T, ho.vever, there �.re to n�.mel;� t}:e h��-rs to t�e Reidel proper.t�j and the proposed �+.pa^tment developer.s. '�Jhen the t;ity �nuncil r,reviolisl,y paid f'or resurfacin�; 7th �treel; out of the (;ener.�,l r'und, a.s pa,rt of developing the ned Owl �tore site, I feel this developrient of the Reidel �,ro;�erty a like sitii<-.ti.on. An eqtzitable soli�tion vaotild be to a��+.iri use the Getier�,l 1�'�ind. �r v�otzld it be the land 'oenef� tE�d--i;he xF�idel �;roperty developer. s: Sincerely, ���'� �.� � Ha.z•old L. Sllllivan 5?.2 66th Avenue NF Fridley, A�TN 55432 e � �' � I ' �. I ,4 I 1 1 373 Mississippi St. N.E. Fridley, Minn. 55432 March 4, 1975 City of Fridley � City Hall 6431 University Ave. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 � ' � ' C � ' .. � � ' � Attentionc City Council and Mayor Subject: Assessment hearing for ST. I974-2 Street Improvement project. The legal description of my pra.��erty is Lat 7, Block 2, Rice Creek Z'errace Plat 1. I recently received a notice of a hearing relative to the improvement of Seventh Street. Since I am not sure that I can attend this hearing I wanted to inform you of my position on this assessment. I was quite surprised to be included on tYie proposed assessment role for this improvement. At the time of the improvement hearing I called and talked to someone in City Hall. I am not positive anymore w]zo it was, but I think it may have been Mr. Brunsell. He explained that the policy for establishing the assessment role was to take the amount of the actual cost that was not to be charged to the directly benefiting side yard owners along 7th St. and spread this remaining cost along the intersecting cross streets for a distance of lZ the way down the block. Upon discussing my particular ].ocation it was agreed that I taas more than z the way down the block. I consequently did not attend the public hearing on the improvement. ,-J) � `K' i .�,�w�� ,�, i Upon receiving the assessment notice I called on 3 March 1975 and talked to the special assessment clerk. She told me my proposed ass�ssment would be $170.00. I again asked how the assessment was spread and again was told that it went � the distance down the block. I attempted to explain that I was , quite sure I was more than that distance from 7th St., but was , assured that I was to be included. After getting home I checked my city maps and assured myself that in the distance from 7th , St. to University Ave, there are twelve 100 foot lots platted starting at 7th St. with lot number 1. My lot, number 7, was in iact, past the half way point. ' . .� , i r'� ' � ' � To: City of Fridley City Counci.l arxd Mayor 3/4/75 Assessment hear•ing for ST. 1974-2 Street Improvement project. � ag� z On 4 March 1975 I called back and again discussed this , with a special assessment clerk (not the same one). This , ti,me I was told tYLat all of x✓ississippi St, from 7th St. to � , University was included in the assessment and the clerk the ' day before fiad been wrong. Since T have been living in Fridley for over 16 years and ' have served on the Plats & Subs subcommittee for over 6 years I have been involved in a number of assessment or potential ', assessment hearings and discussions. I know that the policy is to spread these side street improvement costs on the property ha].f way down the block on the intersecting frontage. ; streets. I cannot see any reason for deviating from this policy in this case. . ' � - The assessment notice indicates that the�costs would b� , spread proportionately "to the benefits received". The only � benefits received in my case are all negative (more traff�,e , � on Mississippi Street ma]cing it harder than ever to get out of i my driv�way}. 7f the benefits received philosophy were to , � � truly be followed in this case, the area to be assessed would , include all of the people clear up to Rice Creek Terrace since they are the people who use 7th St., not me. , ' Tn conclusion I want to ask that you follow the pol.icy �, which spreads the cost only half the wdy down the block. This' is the only equitable thing to do. Rationalizing any other , � course of action wi21 not be administering the cities business' properly. ' � � GWM/rd � ' � � ' �ours truly, � .,: � `° ��- �� - ,��:. --�� . ' Geo e W. Meissner __ �: . � C ' CITY OF rRIDL1;Y ANOKA COUN'CX, riINNLSOTA �— ' 6 NOTICE OF IiEARING OT ASSESSrfENT I'OR ST. 1974-4 S�.CRE�T IMPROVEMENI' PR0.7ECT Notice is hereby �iven that the Council of the City af �ridley c��i11 meet at the � City Hall in said City on the lOth day of March , 1975, at 7:30 o'clock P.M., to hear and pass upon a11 objections, if any, to the pro- posed assessments in res�ect to ttie following improvement, to-wit: ' ' 1 ' � � I ' . ST. 1974-4 STI�ET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT . The proposed assessment roll for each of saici iriprovemen.ts is no�.� on file and open to public inspection by a11 persons interested, in the office of the Cle�lc � � of said City. . At said hearing the Council will consider wri�ten or oral objections to the ' proposed assessments for each of said improvenien�s. The getteral nature of the improvements and each of them is the consLr_uct:ion af!. � street i.mprovements including gr.ading, stabili�ed base, bituminous sur.£acing,', concrete curb and gutter, incidental storm sewer systems, water and sanitary .I ... sec�er services, sidewalks, and other facilities located. as follows: Mississippi Street: Central Avenue to Stinson Boulevard (County Road) � The area pro�,osed to be assessed for said improvements and each of. them is a11. that land benefited by said improvements or each of them and lying wa.thin the general area above noted. . Said improvements will be assessed against the properties within the above noted areas in whole or in part proportionaL-e1y to each of the lands therein contained according to the benefits received. � A property owner may appeal an assessment �o the distriat caurt by servin� • notice of appeal upon the City Playor or Clerk �,rithin t�oenty (20) days after adoption of L-he assessment anct filing such no�:ice raitl� the distrzc� court within ten (10} days aiter service upon the Mayor or C1erk. , DL�TED THTS 1.Oth DAY OF February , 1975, BX ORDER OF Tii�l CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY. ' � ' . ' '� ', . . r ATTESt: CITY CI.LRK Marvin C. �runsell 0 Mv►s � ' Publish: I�ridley Sun on February 26 and March 5, 1975. William J. Nee ' MEMO T0: NASIM QURESHI, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY COUi1CIL FROM: MARVIN BRUNSELL, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGElt/FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR ST. 1974-4 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MISSISSIPPI STREET: STINSON BLVD. TO CENTRAL AVENUE DATE: MARCH 3, 1975 The ST. 1974-4 Street Improvement Project involves street resurfacing and the installation of curb and gutter on Mississippi Street. Also included is the sidewalk on the ::orth side of Mississippi Street. Included in the project is a portion of sidewalk which had to be torn up during the construction and replaced,Maintenance on existing sewer lines, and incidental storm sewer work on Mississippi Street between Stinson Blvd, and Central Avenue. CURB AND GUTTER (Assessable portion - $17,495.54) The front foot assess�ent rate is $3.77 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $1.02 per foot. Balance of cost paid by County. � SIDEWALK--NORTH SIDE OF STREET ONLY ($12,433.16) The front foot assessment rate is $5.53 per foot. The side-yard assessment rate is $1.60 per foot. State Aid Funds in the amount of $1,294.02 will be used to pay for 234 feet of existing sidewalk which had to be torn up and replaced. ,FAIIQTENANCE OF �XISTING SEWER LINES This work amounting to $2,180.25 will be paid from the Utility Fund. � � 0 CITY OF �'RII)I.EY ANOKA COUNTY, rfINN�SOTA NOTICE 0�' HEARING OF ASS�SSMENT FOR SANITARY S�WER, WATER, AND STOI2I�I S�W};R IMPROV�r1ENT PROJECT N0. 114 Notice is hereby given that the Council of tfie City of Fridley will meet at the City Hall in said City on the lOth day of February, 1975 , at 7:30 o'clock F.ri., to hear and pass ut» n all objections, if any, to the pro�osed assessments in respect to the following improvement, to-�ait: S�INITARY SEWER, LdAT�R, �N17 STORM SEh'ER IrSPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 114 The proposed assessment ra11 for each of said impr.ovements is now on file and open tu publ-ic inspection by all persons intere-:ted, in the office of the Clerk of said City. . At said hearing the Counc.il wi11 consider wri.tten oz' oral objections to the proposed assessments for. each of said improv�ments. The general nature of the improvenients and each of them is the construc�ion of water mains, sanztary sewer, laterals and service connections, storm SP_�J�C and appurtenances and clrainage facilities for drainage tributary to ditche� and drainage basins in the following areas: Property that is bounded by 66th Avenue on the North, 61s� Avenue on the South, Arthur Street and ICerry Lane on the West, and Stinson Boulevard on ' the East. Property tYcat is bounded by 81st Avenue on the North, Osborne Ra�d on the � South, Main Street on the West, and University Avenue on the East. McKinl�y Street: 75th Aveizue to Lakeside Road. ' � 7 The area proposed to be ass��ssed for said improvements and each of them is all thaC land beziefited by said improvements or eacti of ttiem and lying within the general area of the above noted boundaries. Said improvements will be assessed againsfi the properties within the above ' noted areas in whole or in parC proportionately to each of the lands therein , contained according to the UeneEits received. • ' �- DATED TFiIS DAY OF TII� CITY COUNCIL OF T1iE CITY OF FRIDL�X. �� ' ATT�ST: � CTTY CLEF.K Marvi�i C. Brunsell MAYOR 1975, BY ORDER OF William J. Nee � �e � , � ' � � ' ' ' � . t . ��/ RESOLUTION N0. - 1975 RESOLUTION CONFIRI�IING ASSESSMF.NT FOR SEWER, t�ATER, AND STORM SEWER iMPROVEMENT' : YROJECT Nt7. 114, AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN TRANSFERS OF FUNDS � BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley, riinnesota, as foll.ow5: l. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers heretofore selected', by this Council for such purpose, calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed for the : SEWER, WATER, ANI� STORM SEYJER IMPROVEMBNT PR�JECT NQ. 114 in said City againsfi every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land in accordance with the provision:s of la�a, and has prepared and filed �oith the ' City Cletk tabulated statements in duplica�e showing the proper descxiption' of each and every Iot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed and the amount calcv.lated against tkte same. ' 2. Notice has been duly published as requireci by law that this Council would meet in special session at this time and.place to pass on the proposeci assessment. 3. Said proposed assessment has at al1 times since its filing been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested, and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons to presei,>�. their objection,;, if any, to such proposed assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have been filed; except � 4. The aniounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed and altered as follows: 5. This Counczl finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels of 1an.d .enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and modified �aas and is specially benefited by the ' SEWER, tiJATEit, AND STORM SEWER IMPROFIEMENT PROJECT N0. 114 ' in the am�unt in said proposed assessment as altered and modified by the corrective rol.l in the amount set opposite the description of each such , lot, piece, or parcel of land, and that said amount so set out is hereby ' levied against each �f the respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein described., including�amounts to be charged to other projects, as. ' follows: ST. 1972 Project -- $ 7,772.00 SS �i�102 Project-�$ 34,503.00 ST. 1973 Project -- 5,100.00 SS 4�106 Project-- 16,�00.00 ST: 1974 Project -- 2,266.25 SS 4�107 Project-- 8,�'43.00 Burlington-Northern Dep. -- 27,000.00 ' . � ` � I ' ' � _� � [l ` o�. � Page 2--RESOLUTION NU. - 1975 6. Such propased assessments as altered, modified, and corrected are affirmed,' ado,�ted, and confirmed, and the sums fixed and named in said proposed assessmen� as alterecl, modified, and corrected with the changes ancl alrera-• tions herein above made, are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper' special assessments �or each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land res- pectively. 7. Said ass�ssment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed sha1l be certified to - by the City Clerk and filed in his office and sha11 thereupon be and con- .' stitute the special assessment far SEWER, WATER, AND STQRM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 11�► 8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piece, or parcel of land sha11 trear interest from the date hereaf until the same have been paid at the rate of ' seven ana one-half (7�} per cent per annum. 9. Such assessment sha11 be payable in twenty (20) annual installments payable' on the lst.day of January in each year, beginning in the year 197b, and ' cantinuing until a11 of said installments shall have been paid, each a_nstallment to be coll.ected with Caxes collectible during said year by the County Auditor. 10. The City Clerlc is hereby directed to make up and file in the office of the Cvunty Auditor of Anoka County a certified statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the amount �ohicl-c will be due thereon on the ' lst day of January in each year. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by ' Councilman , and. upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: - ' and the following voted against the same. � PASSED ANB ADQPT'ED BY THE CITX COUNCIL OF THE CiTY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY •OF , 1975. . ATTEST: , ' . CITY CLERK ' Marvin C. Brunsell MAYOR William J. N�e �' � � II � � � i�IE;MO T0: NASIM QURESHI, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MARVIN C. BRUNSELL, ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER/FINANCIAL DIRECTOR , St3BJECT: FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL I'OR SANITARY SEWER, WATER, AND STORM SEWER TMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 114 ' Sanitary Sewer, Water, and Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 114 involves ' the installation of water and sewer laterals and services on McKinley Street between 75th Avenue and Lakeside Road, and in the Aarris Lake Estates Addi- ' tion and same adjacent properties. There are two different areas in this ' � project which are being assessed for storm sewer. , A brief summary of the assessment rates for each portion af the improve- ment follows: WATER AND SEWER LATERALS AND SERVICES ON MCKINLEY STREET The front.foot assessment rate for water lateral is $11.05 per foot. The front foot assessment rate for sewer lateral is $9.99 per foot. There are seventeen water services at a cost of $212.05 per service. There are seventeen sewer services at a cost of $289.12 per service. WATER AND SEWER LATERALS AND SERVICES IN THE IiARRIS LAKE ESTATES ADDITION AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES The front foot assessment rate for water lateral is $9.55 per foot. The front foot assessment rate for sewer lateral is $9.59 per foot. There are s�venty-two water services at a cost of �200.69 per service. There are seventy-faur sewer services at a cost of $299.17 per service. f STORM SEWER (Area bounded by 66th Ave. on the North, 61st Ave. on the South, Arthur St. and Kerr� Lane on the West, and Stinson Blvd on the EasC) This portion of the storm sewer assessment has been divided into four sub- districts--Area A, Area B, Area C, and Area E. (See maps in assessment roll for outlines of each area. In addition there is an Outfall cost which is spread equally over all four areas. Area A has an assessment rate of $1.12 per 100 square feet of area. Area B and Area C both have an assessment rate of $2.73 per 100 square feet of area. Area E has an assessment rate of $6.49 per 100 square feet of area. J - - � , . � Page 2, Memorandum Regarding SW & SS No. II4 � March 7, 1975 ' , The Outfall assessment rate is $.96 per l0U square feet of area, and is to ' i' be assessed to Areas A, S, C, ancl E in addition to thE.t specific �ssessment ' rate for that particular area. ' STORM SEWER (Area bounded by 81st Ave. on the North, Osborne Road on the South, Main St. on the West, and University Ave, on the East) This storm sewer is divided into two parts, a main interceptor area and a ' � � storm sewer lateral area. � I The assessment rate for the storm sewer main interceptor area is $3.10 per 100 square feet of area. ', � � The assessment rate for the storm sewer lateral area is $3.37 per 100 square ' feet of area. ' ' ' . e e - � � : � t � � ., � � � � � � t � �� MEMO T0: 1��M0 FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Nasim M. Qureshi, City Manager Richard N. Sobiech, Public Works Director March 6, 1975 Zoning of Frontier Club � Upon initial review of the application presented by Mr. Richard Povlitzke for a liauor license, investigation was made regarding the existing property in respect to certain require- ments, as follows: 1) Area of the parcel of property 2) Building area 3) Appropriate ex�erior d.evelopment, parking and land- scaping On the application it was noted that the parcel of property ' was zoned "commercial". This, together with the knowledge that the Frontier Club had an existing 3.2 license and a set-up license, led us to assume that issuance of a liQuor license was not out of order. ' Initial examination of the problem regarding exterior development, building size, seating capacity, parking, landscaping,', compliance with proposed revised ordinance, etc. held our attention throughout the public hearing and subseauent City Council meetings regarding the lic{uor license application. When, , at the City Council meeting of February 24, 1975 the Council in- dicated their intention to adopt a resolution of intent to reserve a lic�uor license for the Frontier Club, another review of the en- , tire application was made. Upon this review, the statement regarding "commercial" , zoning was looked at more closely and it was discovered that ' though the property was zoned a Commerical District, it was more , specifically a C-1 District. Upon investigation into the� zoning ordinance, it was discovered that C-1 and C-1S Districts specifically exclude taverns,beer gardens, and like establish- ments and prohibit businesses serving alcoholic beverages on the premises. After checking with the Finance Department, it was , determined that the existing 3.2 license was existing prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance and therefore, were ' "grandfathered" in. Attached please find a summary of the history of the operation prepared by the Finance Department. Further info�- mation regarding the existing licenses can be abtained from the , Finance Director. �� E�� Memo to N.Qureshi -2- Re: Zoning of Frontier Cl..ub 3-6-75 It should be pointed out that �the zoning ordinance does not allow any extension of the operation of a legal non-con- forming use; therefore, through subsec{uent City Staff discussions, it was determined that in order for a liquor license to be issued to the Frontier Club, appropriate rezoning must take place. Tlie zoning which would allow the operation requested and the issuance of the lic{uor license would be C-2 or C-ZS. A review of all the other applicants indicate that the zoning is proper. . It was thought that this matter should be brought to your attention so that all parties concerned might be aware of the potention problem that exists. RNSJjm CC: Virgil Herrick Maxvin Brunsell Darrel Clark Wyman Smith e Q �.�8A 8� The '�Off Sa1e►� portion of the liquor store has been in o erati Octob�r, 19I�y, Th� 'rOn Sale'� opera-tions were begun during the�latter� part of FebruarSr, �95p. (From Audit Report of 1950) Dispensary No. Z was operated as an "On'� and «Off" sale store throu h the year 1956 and then as an "Off" sale dispensaxy. (�om Audit Report o� 1 Operations at Stor� No. 1 were discontinued on Fe'oruary 15 1 6 95B) Report af 1964) , 9 It. From .A.udit List of On Sale ?3eer Licenses for the Frontaer Club: � 1962 - 3 Hans Ha:�ssn ' 929 Chicaga Av�. 196Z - 2 Jaseph Morris 47_lt � 22nd �ve, Norrnan Alberice � �t�32 2zg St. ' Columbia Hei�hts (Fridle�t Ni-te Club) 1960 - 1 � idley American Lp ', V• M. Nage1, Pres,Vgion 1959 - 60 Robert Haskvi�z � ' 25�1 Lowry ld. E � ' (Fridley Road House) ' 1957 - 8 Clifford Nlacltenzie (Fridley Nite Club) ■ � • t . , � � � ' � ' �__ .� � � � , � � � t•:oti.on 1��;� Vy�, sec�t�c?ed by T•tai•c�icc9_ .to adont xeso'lution as t'ol].��..�s ar<: s�nd �ne cony o" saMe t:o the :.'•oard of �'ammissior.ers� �oun!:y of �lnoka: � ��lLi^;;FA3 � s;ast ? iv�� •;cad � ncla des 1(;natecl a, Ccunty State Ai.ci t:i�;:n:ra�r '=1 within "no'ca Count;y �nd L-he Ci.ty ef 1'ri.ci].ev ' s � Co,inc;� cr.a:i nto-yi nea : oa�:l t�at travels i:he com- plete ?_enp,tli of' t}:e C it,y cl rridley � and � l•!zi?;;��.A �, rece�?t traff'ic ccurzts ta?cen b,y �!no'•ca �'cu:lty en(;i.neer;n�; stai'i' s��o�:�s an e:cass o-� �+�500 vehicles per i:�,�enty-four hour a��era ;e, and �dFIF'RFAS, said road is usc�d extensivn_lf by residents af "no?'t� Couni.y �.n ccr�muting to and frocn the h?inneapol�.'s mat:ropoli.tan area, and � t••'�ir:�??A "� � the nresent ra�,dw;; � i. s�decir.eCl 1.??Sl?�L 1C10T1t for nresent and expected �ui;ure traif; c der::ar.ds, PiC`?.1, �'�:�;;�P•,�'0.°,:�:, :_� 7"' RFSOT V'�D, by the Cit�y Covr_cil oa the Ci.ty cf' �ridley: Z. ihat t`�e �'oard of Coinmissioners cr Anoka �o�irty be requested ta give serious consi.dez•at�on to i;r:raed�.ate re- construction o' �as� River Road to a s•ridth s�;.f� icie?it to carry� present a?:� es'�i_ma�eci "utur� traffic vclumes based on the antic��nated ran�d deve�on:ner.t of t�nel.a �ounty, 2. That t'=e 9dmin?.;trative Stafi nr.d engineers of thn C1.t,y oF rric.l.e,� �;�v� fu]1 cooperat�on tn tne Ceuni:y e.r.�;?.neer ar.d staif in ohtain�.r� n�cessary �r�� ormatior_ zor i:he desi�n of the ne�a rcad;�ra;� ar.d water dra?na�e iacili�ies. ?'assed ±hi_s 28�:h da� of Sente:nber, i�57. � . � � �C �-�--, ,•laycr --� • �� r� ^ , / �i/����,'„/-,-/('�. .�^�" =%f r"t"....Yr �.f!.+! �i. . .. }'� � Cleric ' Mot�on c�rr.ied unan�m��usl.�i. ' � .._ I�!�tion bar ?�arcucc? to pern:i.t bci•r and arro�•� hurit�.nd 4rithin �he City of Fri.dl.ey durind t!-:e �tate auiy:orized ilunti.n�; deer season� �seccnded by Sherid: n. :lction carrie� unar_imously. 2�!o�,ion i�,y Sher-dar., secor.ded by Vye authori.z:tn,r. t'•e C;.t,y mana�>er to empl.ov a centractor tn replace !:he openin;s in the �•�all be- t:t•�ecn t-�e pacica�e strre ar.d or.-sal.e� liquer sa?:es room at li.ouor stcre ;=1. t,e+:i on carried un�nimotisly. t�Iot3.on t�y� ?',arcucci� seccrded b,y Sheridan author�zing ti�e mana- Yer to negotiat:e t�r�r.inat�on of lcast: agreer;ent �:rith D:r. �oh Carlson ior buildin,;� at: �36j CenL-ra:1 Avenue� c::rried uiianimously. 14cti.cn by Sreri.dan, seccnded b3� �rye �pproving lic�rls�s for , cigarettq� t�vern onera+.ion� non-9.nt�xicatin� matt li�ucr and , cafe oneration to :�'r. Clifi I.. I�`acYenzie. t:o�ion caz•ried iz^ar. i m�i � sl,�� . . T�irtion by ?ta: ciacct, seconded by VyA authorizi•n�; tl�e Ctty �•fanaper � to enter i.nto �n a�*,rc+e^�er.t for th� Ci.ty with ?'.r, t4ac Yer.aie 1:r. rent Cit,y eaui.nrnen1: ar ].i.nt.i�r ci�tsp�ns��r;� at J3b5 C�ntrral Avernxe at: a montilly r:�te of ti5�.00. t•ic�tinn carried iJnanirnously. . � ! . . � • . . . .. .• . 8C � y .E r� :; �I � i ' `z �� � t i � ' I�I ' rfotion hy i-iarcucc�t, :;ecended by Vye to adjcurn, carried Uriariititctisly �� 9:�I-�"j A.�i. ( •') .� , ' . .�' �i%l//. /,� ; uF . 1 �i, �,l � ., . _=' ;; �f: - �.__ ., . U �-C, s? -�--� . Attest : _t ______� _ � _ ?,tay .r • Octcber 1, 1q57 � The regular meetin� of ths City Cou:�cil of Fri�ile;/, hfi.nnesota was ca'Led � to or3er at 7:30 t•.hl, b� ;'aycr Greio. kre;;eat werc Greig, Jo'r.ar�son, vye, ?'tarcucci and �heridan. P;one iasre ab�ent. Minutes of September me�tin�•s were read an3 anrroved as read. Bids for construction of storta drainage facilities on Logar. rar�cc;a� � were ope:;e�i as iollorr^,: � Sand�tron & Hafner `�' 12�21,O.00 ' Kand�11 Brc�. 14,673.50 � lr!ca].bon Exc. Co. 15,466.;0 Herbst Const. Co. 18�905.00 hSotion by 3ohanson, secon3e3 by t'arcucci that bils £or construc�ion of storm'draina�e facilities ba turne3 over to �tinder L'i�gir.�erir,g Co:�*��ny for tabulation, i�Iction caxried us:ani*nously, t:otion by 2-klrcucci, �ecanded by Sheridan to ado-,t Crdinance ;`03, 1•�nich is ttn orclinance ��n:iir.g tne zoni: & orainaxice oi �he �ity of Frid1��, by m.a'tiuo a change in said or3inance with re�� d to area describ�d as follo4�s : • � A11 that „art of Block one (1) of Ha�nilton's Additian to ?�Iechanicsville, Lrhich i^ ncrr zoned ft-1 � bein� ge<:er211jr bou:id.ed U;; 57 �h �venue, 7th Gtreet� 5Eth Gvernic und 6th Street, from R-1 to R-2. Aiotion carried unanimousl�r. • • • First readin� of Grdinar.ce �`87 ti�s given on change in zoning frc*_n R-1 to R—� on Lot �ix (6), „uditcr's Subdivision ir?_1. On the COIiS1C1EI�ahon of industrial acce�s routes on 49th hvenue an3 t��i_n °treet; tlie citizen's of the area w�re rerreGented b� hlr, hiike tJelch� attorne;� i;?io requc:sted t�:o thin�;� u re;,olution ..revicu;ly made be rescii�ded, c�n3 that a cor:vnil.tez be an�oir.ted tc study t:,e question. I•[r. He3 'icrrie of i%s:lland Coo,, to� 1 Cour.cil th:t his eomnlr.y t�ished to coo�erat�, The question wa� rzised <^.s to ho�.r man� -.eo-.le Srom l+9th Avenue bfare rreseut, There were four .,co le. Recon��endation ' by Sherldaci thc�t �ouncil ask that citi; cn';; com�;ittee� ..l.�nnin� Co�nmi� :ion eln3 r.nS• other „flrties involvecl �et to�;ether nt,d ttiat �ctioii talceri Se-.tc�nber 3rd with re�ar9 to nccess s•e�r.ain. Citi�en's co:a,sttoa to bo re•.rer:enteri by three reo„le, from arca, ;4�rio t�,3rcucci to bo renresentativo from the Council an3 re�reser.tativo of I`1Einning Cos�nis�ion aF�ointed b� i�uyor. /l ►,ublic ticarino vn ..ro�c�.ed atorm drnina;c in t}ie vicir.it;; of F'.is.^,. Strect wa� then heLd. TY:cre wa� no one �re�;ent in fzvor un3.i�anf uere �resent th,�t wero o-.,.o :eci. Entirc ..roceduro of ,torm drninu�e ex�laiira by t•tr. Bob 1-tinler. t.o uction unn tukon. .� ,.. !`` l .' ., ! ' �.• � � � �i ;t ti: �F CITY OF FRIDLEY M E M 0 R A N D U M T0: NASIM M. QURESHI, CITY MANAGER FROM: MARVZN C. BRUNSELL, ASST. CITY MGR./FIN. DIR. SUBJECT: HISTORY OF THE ON-SALE BEER LICENSE AT THE FRONTIER CLUB � DATE: MARCH 7, 1975 � . � The minutes of the Council meeting of February 28 show that the City Council authorized the City Manager to terminate the lease agreement with Mr. Bob Carlson owner of the building at 73b5 Central Avenue Northeast for the on-sale operation, At that same meeting, the City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into agreement on behalf of the City with Mr. McKenzie to rent the City equipment at liquor dispensory, 7365 Central Avenue Northeast. The equipment �nvolved was the on-sale or bar equipment. At that same meeting the City Council approved licenses for cigarette, tavern, non-intoxicating. � malt liquor, and the cafe operation for Mr. C1iff McKenzie. A history of the license holder for on-sale beer is shown on the the attached page. The City did not adopt an ordinance setting up set-up licenses until July 20, 1964. The "Off Sale" portion of the liquor store has been in operation since October, 1949. The "On Sale" operations were begun during the latter part of February, 1950. (From Audit Report of 1950) Dispensary No, 1 was operated as an "Qn" and "Off' sale store through the year 1956 and then as an "Off" sale dispensary. (From Audit Report of 1958) Operations at Store No. 1 were discontinued on February 15, 1964. From Audit Report of 1964} List of On Sale Beer Licenses for the Frontier Club: �964 - 5 Marlene Povlitzke 1963 - 4 Marlene Povlitzke 1962 - 3 Hans Hansen 929 Chicago Ave. 1961 - 2 Joseph Morris 414 - 22nd Ave. Norman Alberice 4432 22 St. Columbia Heights (Fridley Nite Club) 1960 - 1 Fridley Ameriean Legion V.M. Nagel, Pres. 1959 - 60 Robert Haskvitz 2501 Lowry N.E. (Fridley Road House) 1957 - 8 Clifford Mackenzie • (Eridley Nite Club) � , � RLSOLUTION N0. _ __ - 1975 RESOLUTION CONrIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR ST. 1974-1 STR�ET IMPROVLML'NT PROJ�CT B� IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of rridley, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers he�-etofore selected � by this Counci_1 for such purpose, calculated tlie proper amounts to be specially assessed for the ST. 1974-1 STR�T'T IMI'ROVET41'sNT PROJ�CT in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land in accordance with the pr_ovisions of law, and has prepared and filed with the City C].erk tabulated statements in duplicaCe sl�owing the proper description of each and every lot, piece, or parcel of land to be speciall_y assessed and the amount caJ�ulated against the same. 2. Notiee has been duly published as required by law that this Council �aould meet in special session at this time and place to pass on the proposed assessment. . 3. Said proposed assessment has at all times since its filing been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested, and an opportunity has been given to all interested persans to present� their objections, if any, to such proposed assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have been filed; except 4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed and altered as follows: ' S. Tl�is Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels of land enumeraCed in said proposed assessment as altered and modified was and is specially benefited by tiie � � ' ' ST. 1974-1 STP.��T ITIPROV�M�NT PROJ�CT in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and niodified by the corrective roll in the amount set opposite the description of each such 1ot, piece, or parcel of land, and tl�.at said amount so set out is hereUy levied a�ainst each of the respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein described. � The chargc of $5,902.00 to the PuUlic Utility Fund is hereUy confirmed. � � PAG� 2--RT:SOLUTION N0. ' - = 1975 6. Such proposed assessments as altered, modified, and corrected are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed, and tlte sums fixed and named in said pr.oposed assessment as altered, modificd, and corrected with the changes and altera- tions hercin ��bove made, are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper special assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land res- pectively. 7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed shall be certified to by the City Clerlc and filed in his office and shall thereupon be and con- stitute the special assessment for ST. 1974-1 STR��T Ir1PROV�MENT PROJ�CT , 8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piece, or parcel of land shall bear interest from the date hereof until the same have been paid at the rate �f seven and one-half (72) per cent per annum. 9. Such assessment shall be payable in ten (10) annual installments payable on the lst day of January in each year, beginning in the year 1976, and continuin�; until a11 of said installments shall have been paid, each installment to be collected �aith taxes collectible during said year by the County Auditor. 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the office of the County A�ditor of Anoka County a cextified statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the amount which will be due thereon on the lst day of January in each year. The motiion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly secondeel by Councilman , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: �nd the following voted against the same. PASSED ANA ADOPTED BY TH� CITY COtiNCIL OF TH� CITY OF rRIDL�Y THIS DAY OF , 1975. ATTEST: CITY CLLF.K Marvin C. 13runsell �r . • � MAYOR William J. Nee RESOLUTION N0. - 1975 RESOLUTION CONFII�'�IING AS5ESSMENT FOR ST. 1974-2 STRE�T IMPROVE�IENT PROJECT l0 BE IT RI:SOLVED by the City Couaci.l of the City of Fridlcy, Minnesota, as follow�: 1. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers heretofore selected by this Council for such purpose, calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed for the _ ST. 1974-2 STREET IMPROV�MENT PROJECT �. in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel. of land in aecordance with the provisions of Iaw, and has prepared and filed with the City Clerlc tabulated statements in dupZicate showing the proper clescription of each and every lot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed anci the amount calculated against the same. 2. Notice has been duly publis'ned as required by law that this Council would meet in special session at this time and place to pass on the proposed assessment. - , 3. Said proposed assessment has at a11 times since its filing been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested, and an opportunity has been given to all interested persans to present their objections, if any, to such proposed assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections � have been filed; except 4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed and altered as folZows: S. This Council finds that each of the l.ots, pieces,.or parcels of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and modified was and is specially benefited by the ST. 1974- 2 STREET IMPROV�MENT PROJECT in the amount.in said proposed assessment as altered and modified by the corrective roll in the amount set opposite the description of each such lot, piece, or parcel of land, and that said amount so set out is hereby levied against each of the res�ective lots, pieces, or parcels of iand therein clescribed. I � � 1 PAGE 2--RF..SOLUTION N0. = i9�s b. Such proposed assessnients as altered, modified, and corrected are affirmed, ' adopted, and confirmed, and the sums fixed and named in said proposed assessm�nt ��s altered, mocti£icd, �ind cor.rected �Tith the ch.�n�n,es and altera- tions hcrein above made, are affirmed, adopted, and confixmed as the proper speeial assessmen.ts for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of lancl res- pectively. 7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed shall be certif ied to ' � by the Gity Clerk and filed in his office and shall thereupon be and con- stitute the special assessment for � ST. 1974-2 STREET IMPROVEMENT PR03ECT , 8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piece, or parcel ot land shall bear interest from the date hereof until the same have been paid at the rate of ' seven and on� -half (7'a) per cent per annum. � � 9. Such assessment shall be payable in ten (10) annual installments payable on the lst day of January in each year, beginning in the year 1976, and continuing until all of said installments sha11 have been paid, each installment to be collected with taxes collectible during said year by the County Auditor. I0. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the o�fice of the County Auclitor of Anoka County a certified statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the amount which will be due thereon on the lst day ot January in each year. ' The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by ' Councilman • , and upon vote being taken ther$on, the following voted in favor �hereof: � � ' � � � � and the folZowing voted against the same. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL QF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY Or , 1975. ATTEST: CITY CL�RK Marvin C. Brunsell � � � MAYOR William J. N�e �� , � RESOLUTION N0. - 1975 RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASSESSMEN7' FOR ST. 1974-4 STREET IMPROV�MENT PROJECT T. �. � BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, as follows: l. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers heretofore selected' by this Council for such purpose, calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed for the ST. 1974-4 STREET IriPROVEMENT PROJ�CT ' in said City against every assessable 1ot, piece, or parcel of land z.n I accordance with the provisions of law, and has prepared and filed with the . City C1erk tabulated statements in duplicate showing the proper description' � of each and e.��ery lot, piece, or parcel of land ta be specially assessed and the amount calculated against the same. � 2. Notice has been duly published as required by 1aw that this Council would meet in special session at this time and place to pass on the proposed assessment. ' � � ' ' ' I' ' ' 3. Said proposed assessmPnt ha.s at a11 times since its filing been open to inspection and copyin� by all persons interested, and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons to present their objections, if any, to sueh proposed assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have been filed; except . 4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed and altered as follo�as: 5. This Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and modified was and is specially benefited by the ST. 1974-4 STREET TMPROVEMENT PRQJECT �'� in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and modified by the corrective roll in the amount, set opposite the description of each such lot, piece, or parcel ot 1and, and that said amount so set out is hereby levied 3gainst each of the respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein described. The charge of $2,180.25 to the Public Utility Fund is also confirmed. � ' 'I ' PAGE 2--RESOLUTION NU. = 1975 6. Such proposed assessments as altered, modified, and corrected are affirmed, adopLed, and confirmed, and the sums fixed and named in said proposed assessment as altered, modified, and corrected with the changes and altera- , tions herein above made, are affirnled, adopted, and confirmed as the proper' special assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land res- pectively. 7. Said as�essment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed shall be certified to ' by the City Clerk and filed in his office and sha11 thereupon be and con- stitute the special assessment for � �J ' e ' I ' � ST. 1974-4 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT . 8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piece, or parcel of land shall bear interest from. the date hereof until the same have been paid at the rate of seven and one-half (7i} per cent per annum. 9. Such assessment shall be payable i_n ten (1.0) annual installments payable , on the lst day of January in each year, beginning in the year 1976, and ' continuing until all. of said installments shall have been paid, each installment to be collected: with taxes collectible during said year Uy the County Auditor. 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the o�fice of the County Auditor of Anoka County a certified statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the amount which wi11 be due thereon on the lst day of January in each year. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilman , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor Chereof: and the following voted against the same. PASSED ANp ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1975. ATTEST: CITY CLERK Marvin C. Brunsell I�IAAYOR uA William J. Nee � RESOLUTION N0. - 1975 RESOLUTION GONFIRMING ASSESSMENT FOR SEWER, WATER, AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 114 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, as follows:', l. The City Clerk has with the assistance of the engineers heretofore selected by this Council for such purpose, calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed for the SEWER, WATER, AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 114 in said City against every assessable lot, piece, or parcel of land in accordance with the provisions of law, and has prepared and filed with the City Clerk tabulated statements in duplicate showing the proper description of each and every lot, piece, or parcel of land to be specially assessed and the amount calculated against the same. ' 2. Notice has been duly published as required by law that this Council would meet in special session at this time and place to pass on the proposed assessment. 3. Said proposed assessment has at all times since its filing been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested, and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons to present their objections, if any, to such proposed assessment, or to any item thereof, and no objections have been filed; except 4. The amounts specified in the proposed assessment are changed and altered as follows: S. This Council finds that each of the lots, pieces, or parcels of land enumerated in said proposed assessment as altered and modified was and is specially benefited by the SEWER, WATER, AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PRQJECT N0. 114 in the amount in said proposed assessment as altered and modified by the corrective xoll in the amount set opposite the description of each such lot, piece, or parcel of land, and that said amount so set out is hereby levied against each of the respective lots, pieces, or parcels of land therein described. Page 2--RESOLUTION N0. - 1975 6. Such proposed assessments as altered, modified, and corrected are affirmed, ' adopted, and confirmed, and the sums fixed and named in said proposed assessment as altered, modified, and corrected with the changes and altera- tions herein above made, are affirmed, adopted, and confirmed as the proper special assessments for each of said lots, pieces, or parcels of land res- pectively. 7. Said assessment so affirmed, adopted, and confirmed shall be certified to by the City Clerk and filed in his office and shall thereupon be and con- stitute the special assessment for SEWER, WATER, AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 114 8. The amounts assessed against each lot, piec-, or parcel of land shall b�ear ' interest from the date hereof until the same have been paid at the rate of seven and one-half (7i) per cent per annum. 9. Such assessment shall be payable in twenty (20) annual installments payable on the lst day of January in each year, beginning in the year 1976, and �ontinuing until all of said installments shall have been paid, each installment to be collected with taxes collectible during said year by the County Auditor. 10. The City Clerk is hereby directed to make up and file in the office of the County Auditor of Anoka County a certified statement of the amount of all such unpaid assessments and the amount which will be due thereon on the • lst day of January in each year. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilman , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same. PASSED AND E�iDOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1975. . ATTEST: CITY CLERK � MAYOR William J. Ne�e Marvin C. Brunsell �A CITY OF FRI DLEY MEMORANDUM T0: NASIM �1, QURESHI, CITY P1ANAGER, AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MARVIN C. BRUNSELL, ASST. CITY MGR./FIN. DIR. SUBJECT: PROPOSED LABOR AGREE��IFNT FOR THE FIRE DEPART�IENT FOR THE YEAR 1975 DATE: FEBRURRY 27, 1975 Attaci�ed i s the proposed 1 abor agreemen� between the Fi re Department and the City for the year 1975. The agreement provides for a salary increase of ten percent. The City's contribution for dependent healtf� insurance has been increased from $5.OQ per month to $15.00 per month; the same as it is doing for other City emnloyees, / Language has been added to the sections of the contract relating to fire calls and inspection pay to the effect t►iat � should it be found that the Fridley Fire Department is bo�rnd by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, these sections , of the contract will be null and void. "1CB:sh � � ,� � , RCSOLUTION N0� �� 1975 '� A RESOLUTION �iPPROVING AND AUTFIORIZING SIG�dING THE AGREEME�lT ESTABLISHING WORKING CONDITIONS, tJ.AGES APID Ii�URS OF E��PLOYEES OF TfiE CITY OF FRIULEY FI RE DEP/1RTMENT FOR THE YEAR 1975 � � � � � WNCREAS, The International Association of Fire Fighters Local No. 1986, as bargaining representative of the Firemen of the City of Fridley Fire Department, has �resented to t��e Council of the City of Fridley various requests relating to the working conditions, vrages and hours of employees of the Fire Department of the City of Fridley� and �dHEREAS; The City of Fridley has presented various requests to the Union and to the em�loyees relating to vror,king conditions, wages and hours of employees of the Fire Department of the City of Fridley, and WHEREAS, Representatives of the Union and the City have met and negotiated regarding the requests of the Union and the City, and WHEREAS, Agreement has notv been reached between representatives of the two parties on the nroposed changes in the existing contract bet�veen the City and the Union. N06J, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, By the City Council that the Mayor ' and �he Ci�;y f�anager are hereby authorized to execute the attached Agreem�nt (Exhibit "A") relating to H�orking conditions, wages and hours of Firemen of the City of Fridley Fire Department, PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS __ DAY OF , 1975, PIAYOR � WILLIAM J, NEE ATTEST: CITY CLERK - MARVIN C. BRU^�SELL � 13A . r . .�, � , . - � I N^ °� 13 B , -- ' ARTICLE I — PURPOSE OF AGREEf�ENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • � � � � ARTICLE I I — R�COGNITION . . . . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . • � � • • . • 2 ARTICLE I I I — DEFI NITI ONS . . . . . . . . . • . . � � • � � � • � ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 2 ' ARTICLE IV — EP�IPLOYER SECURITY , . . . . . . � . • . . . � � • • � � � • � � ' 3 ARTICLE V — EPTPLOYER AUTHORITY , . . , . . . � . . , • • . � � � • � � , • � • 4 ARTICLE VI — U�lION SECURITY. , , . . � � . . � • � � � � � � � � � � � • ' ' . " 5 ARfICLE VII — EMPLOYEE RIGHiS — GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE , , , . . . . : � � � � • 6 ARTICLE VIII — SAVINGS CLAUSE . . . . . . , � � • � • • � � � � � • � � • ' ' >> ' ARTICLE I X — SENIORITY . . . . . . . . , . . . � �• � . . . . • , . . . . . . . 11 ARTICLE X — DISCIPLI:"�E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � . . s . . . . . . . . . � 12 ARTICLE XI — !AJORK SCHEDULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . , . . . . . . . 13 ', ARTI CLE XI I — VACATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . 14 ARTICLE XIII — PAY FOR FIRE CALLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 ARTICLE XIV — EMPLOYEE EDUCA7ION PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 ARTICLEXV — HOLIDAYS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < . . . . . . . 17 ARTI CLE XUI — SI CK LEA11E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 ARTICLEXVII — INJURY ON JOB . . '. . . . . . . • • . . + • � � � • � � � • � • �$ ' ARTICLE XVIII — PROBATIONARY PERIODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • • 19 ARTICLEXIX — FUNERAL PAY . . , . . . . . . • • • � � � � � � • • � • • • • � 19 ARTICLE �XX — JURY PAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 ARTICLE XXI — UNIFORM ALLOWANCE , . , . . . . . . . • • • � • � � � � � • • • 19 ' ARTICLE XXII — HEALTH AND HOSPITAL INSURANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 ARTICLE XXIII — PAY FOR INSPECTION . . . . . . . . . . • • • � � � • � • • • • 20 ARTICLEXXIV — RATES OF PAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • • � � • 21 ' ARTICLE XXV — ADDI7IOiVAL IAICENTIVE PAY , . . . . . . • . . • • • � � � • � • � 2� , ARTICLE XXVI -� COLLEGE CREDITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • � . � • • � 22 ' ARTICLE XXVII — SEVERENCE PAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • � � � � � � 22 ARTICLE XXVIII — WAIVER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � . � . . . . . . . � . 23 ARTICLE XXI X — DURAT I OW . . . . . • . • • • . • . • . . • . . . • • • . • • • 24 S LA30R AGREEMENT�. BET!�JEEN CITY OF FRIDLEY AND ItJTERNATIOfdRL ASSOCIATION OF FI RE FI GHTE RS LOCAL PdO. 1986 ARTICLE I PURPOSE OF AGREEh1ENT This AGREEMENT is entered into as o` February 27� 1975 between the City of Fridley, hereinafter called ti�e E1�iPL0YER, and the INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATIO�J OF FIRE FIG;iTERS LJCAL N0. 1986, hereinafter called t4�e UNION. It is the intent and purpose of this AGREEMENT to: � : a----A�sa�e-se�r�d-a�d-�a�aa��3+-�e�e�� e�a�-r�e�l�� ��-a�d-eee�er��e ���a��e�sb��s-�e�wee�-�be-�a���es-�e�e�e;- 1.1 Establish procedures for t�e resolution of disputes concerning Thi s AGREE�1EP�T' S i nterpretati on and/or appl i cati on ; and . 1.2 Place in written �orm the parties's agreement upon terms and conditions of employment for the duration of this AGREEP•1ENT. The EMPLOYER and the UNION throug�� this !�GREEt•1EiVT shall continue their dedication to t��e highest q�ality fire service and oroteetion to the residents of the City of Fridley. Both parties recognize this AGREEMEiVT as a pledge ar this dedication. L C . � � . • . . . . • . • -2- • .� � • '• ' '13 D �. 'I .` �i,IZ'�'ICI�T� TI 1�1�COCN!'1'ION . . ' 2.1 The rnZPLO�'�R reco�ruzes the U�IION as the exclusive represeni;al:ive, � � • under Minnesoia Statutes, Section 17J.71, Subclivisi.on 3, for all . � . ersoruiel i.n the fol.lotiving job classificati.ons: � - P ,' 1. Fire F.ighters : . . � � � 2. Fir2 �ap��ai� � . . • �. � . �... 2. 2� Tn the eveni:�the �12PLOX�I� and ihe UNION are unable to agree as ' . ; - . � to the inclusion or exc�usion oi a ne-.;° or modified job class, the - . i.ssue shall be submi.tted i:o the Bureau of Mediation Services for . � _ � . . . . . . ' . . . determa.nation. • - ' • • • � : . - - . . ' . A�R`.CICLE III DFTII�TITIO\TS . � - � . ��� • 3.Y � U1,'ION: The International Association of_Fire Fighiers Local No. � . _ � � . � 1.986, _ _. ^ � —. _ _ ; • . � . e � .: . . 3. 2 t11?ION I��IE iVIB�Ii: A member of tlie international Association .of = '' ._ Fire Fighters Local i�io. 1986._ .. _z _ ' � _ � � . F • � . 3. 3. E�1�IPL0'�'�F: �, member of the e�clusively recogni�ed bargainin� ' r. u���t. . � .: :...� � - ._. . . . � 3. � D�P,A,RTI7�NT: The City of Fridley • Fire. Departrnent. �� ' 3 5 �niPLOY �P: Thc Cit of , Fridley. . � . Y ' 3. G Chicf; The Chief of the Fi�e Dep�. � of� the �ity_ of Fridley. � . ' 3.7 v�ronY arrzcx?R: Officcr clectcd or appozntecl by the Internationa.� + �� ' � . , . � �- A�sociation of Firc Pighters Local No. 198G. _� y•_ :_��:,�, . ' • � ;' ,,;� � � , • . . .. . ., , . , , . , � , • ' . , . • . . . . � • .� � : ,, �3� � E � � �: � � . • . 3.a. OVERTIt�E: 41ork performed at the express authorizat�on of the EMPLOYER . ' in excess of the employee's scheduled shift. . 3.9 SCHE�ULEQ SNIF1': A consecutive ►�rork period including tti•ro rest � � a.s and a lunch break. � . bre � � 3.10 RCST aREAKS: Two periods during the SCHEDULED SHIFT during t-rhich the • employee remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duti�s. � 3.11 LUP�CH �REI'�Y.: A period during the SCNEDULED SHIFT duriny ��rhich the employee remains on con�inual duty and is responsible for assigned duties. � _ � • � ful . � 3.12 STRIE:E: Concerted action in failing to report for duty, the will , absence from one's position, the s�op�;.�e of titi�ork,, slo���-do��rn, or abstin�nce in whole or in part fro;n the full, faithful and proper performance of the �' � duties of em lo meni; for the ur oses of indu�ing, influencing or coerciing P Y P P ' � a change in the conditions or compensation or the righ�:s, privileges or' obligations of employment. � � e3.13 BASE R/aTE OF PAY: The Employee's monthly rate of pay exclusive of long�evi�y e.. or any other special allot�rances. � � . � 3.14 COt�1PENSATO�Y TIr�iE: Time off during the employee's regularly scheduled i�lork .' � � schedule equal in time to overtime ti��orked. � � � � ' ' . ' � -. 3.15 SEVERANCE PAY: Pay�nent made to an employee upon honorable separation af �,. � employment. � � . AR7ICLE IV E?�1PLOYER SECURITY ' , 4.1 The t1NI0N agrees that during the life of this AGREEt�1EN7 it will not cause, � encourage, participate in or support any strike, slow-do��rn or other ' . ini:errupi:ion of or interference with the normal functions of the EMPLOYER. � • •' ' � � � , , . , • . • • , ,. - - �; .' , ,; , •' -4- • � . , . . . . . . •�� . ' "^ .: '- . . . . � :-Z - - :A.'rr;s* -e�i � } e�'�f.'C.' -'1y}1{T �Ci'i� R i,�G�: T -i�3- �- -f`rf�)� i-G� - iRd-,� - �� ��/G � H-6 -��K�-F �- �, . . . , .� . , • I ' • • a��si-�}t��r��-c�x-c�-���x.��--��=�-i-r��=f-cc�-�3=ikE-�A'��'-�Q�'�� • elf�ctiv e-the-d a�E�- th�- vivial.i d:z- iir��-o�-cux-s .- --Sn�Yr terzrirna.tron , . � � . ' . • � sh�r�.�-b�-ef£cctirc-n�1cm-�n-i1,tcTrrrot�.�' .��rv�-upon th� �yrrsl�s��: � � � �x�-.G��k��: r�-0- a�ko- � s- a�� � �'-�-�� -���- �}o�-t-�o� -o-f- �ri-s- �� o�� � e� 5'�S-i G `rI�3-.�,A � `r'�'�. �.�3 E}t.�- �?c?T=�iik�'S �'O Fl � - Oi'' �'d �10-'d-�3'��c �'T3' 3 -Y,'1 � c� }� � • ��-kF3-�3��'-i-��'0-3�1-��3G-�H���3G�'�O:��ee-o�-kz�s-c�n�zes-�rz�{.�mn�t � ' . . � . • • }� � ^� ' . • . .. pe��Kf;s-i�=f-�-o�--:� l��s-�?_�.�3 ��':i� �O�.E3�-c�n-�he-�l�-te-�or-c�ates ' . w��:-xx-a-s���4e-o���s-�s-����.a £aeie-�m�e�t�rn�-�tr}xave-err�Uet3' •�.- � .� , . , • . . . •i�r-a-gtrz-l�e-az�-�;uch-c}atc-ox~d-� i�.-s. . _ A��z��koge�e-��xo-��,,�a� �13�-si-�-i��°es-�nd-�rhe��-�--errr�l-osm�rf- �..� . � • �. �ia:�- �e�ex-�eY��n �-�e�- -�o�- -su�h-��t's on-::iay,--sub�-e�n�� io' 13F��` ��ir��. ��.l�t��,-�-be-a��a��i-ec� -o�-���}�e���e�l- o� �-i�rploqe-a- -crr ���3I-��eEl,---}nzt-�r� -�n�rp�aS��'��ris�`tm��b�at`iori zor : . . - � . f�vo-�xefrps-�-i.-��r 3��e�t-�e-st��r-ci�v'rl-��i-c�e-statn �;- i:ErnzP� o� -���p�o����i; - -o-z} -ee�ti3-4 e�. 4f- e��rl�*rrrent,- -a s-3��- -(s�r�� �'q . . . ' }��.v�'{�'rercfoforc-�re-�n-entz�-lcr�. : . �, " . t • � A�o- �e-i�kcjy e �- �� r.��-1- � -e-r�'ri.-�� e�:- � �- a�� �l ;�i-l�r �pay; -�ra � vr - : . . per-d�.rxn forth�rZ:rgs-on-��ii-ch-he-fsh�-enortb�zl"�� � ��"ri.I{e. � � � . � �. ATt�'�CL� V LA1PL01'Tl� n.LITIIOl �1.T�.' • ' � , 1 •- • ' 5. �. Tlic l�l'I1'LO�'�Z� i•ctains ilic full ancl itni•csi:ricfcd� ri.bl�i: to opc�rztc ' ,' c'lYlf� 111�IlFtaC IIIl lll:i�ipa�vcr, fZCilitics, a�id �qui.tnnciit; to est�Ulxsli . , . . I'I � ' �' . .� �1111CixOnS and Pro�rams; to sct a�icl 1111C2)CI hUC�bct� ; io cictcrmi.i�c tltic utili•r.�tioz� of tcclit�olo��•; to cst�Uli�li :�»cl moclif�• tlic oi•�zniiltihn,tl • ' ' . . ' ' � ' • . '', 1 � � , ' . 0 . � �. . • ' , � � . , ' � . � M J N , : , _. . , � . � , _- , , ' � , 13 G • si:x�«cture; to select, di.rect, at�cl cietermine ihe numbe�• of personncl; . , . . � . . to estai�li.sl� tivorl: scl�eclulcs, ancl ta perforxn any inherent nzana�eri.al . .functian not specific�illy liinited by this L�GRL�112LI�7T. . 5. 2 .l1ny term and conclili�on of employincnt nof specifically e�tak�lished , - � or n�odifiecl by this .l1GI;�.Li1-Iri�TT shall remai.n solely �vithin the - cii.scretion of t11e �112I'LOY�l; 1:o moclif3�, e.�i:ablish, or eliminai;c. �� L1fiTICL1; �'I U\TIO;�T SECURITY . �. ' � �� 6. J. Ti1G �R�IJ':LOi.' �'R sl�iali cieciuet frorn ihe tva�es of emplaS�ees lvho . .' , aui�iorize stich a deduction in �•rriting an amount necessar�� i:o ' • � - cover mon{hly UI�TION ciues. Such m_oni�es s11a11 be r. en�iited a�s � dir�cfied b � i;he U1�'IOI�I. � � . 3 . ' 6. 2 The Ul��ION ixiay clesi�nate employees from ihe bargainin� unii; to - � aci; as a si.e�vard and an alternate and shall inform ihe FIl2PLOi'1�I� � ' . � . . . in �t►ri.i:ing of such choice and changes in the positian of ste�vard and /or .' . ali;ernate. � . � ' � � . � � G. 3 �'lle �1�ZPLO�.T�P sliall �.nake space avai.lable on i:he emplo3:ee bull.ei:in � Uvard for postinb UITTON notice(�) and aiinouilcemeni;(s). - '' � e. . � . . � � 6. � T}ie UI�ION a�i•ees io indexnni.fy and ]iold thc �14zPL01'�R liarmless' , a�;ainst any and all claims, suii;�, ordcrs, or jud�meni:s Urought ' � or issuccl a�;�inst thc rl�Zi'LOl'�P as a result of .�ny aci:ion tal:cn oi� not tal:en by the I�R�IPLO�'ER unciez• the provisions. of this Articl.e. ' ' , ' � . . . . � . . . . . •�� ,• ' • 0 . • i � I � . � . . . '� , , :' � • � ' • • . , r • '� ` A13TICLL VTI �.I��f 1�J�OYE � RIGITTS - G1�ILVANCL I'1�OCI:DUl�I� � .• • . � • 7..1 nx�rinl�rzonT o�? n c;1z7.��vA�rci: . .. ' . . ,A gri.evance zs defincd as a dispui:e or disaUreement as to the � infer refiation or a�la.cation of ihe speciiic i:ernls and conditi�ns . p PI � , . ' ' ..e .. � .' ' i _. '. ' i � . � ' � of this IS.GI;L �i�71�NT. 7. 2 Ui\I�\T I�T,1�l,T:SI�NT:ITIV}�S 0 '13H . �'hc 1�I12�PLOYLR «'i.11. r. eco�zize k��YP.I�SI�NT.l1'I'IV]sS desi�,*nal:ed �,; �he Ul\IOi�T as the.�rievance represc�zital:ives of i:he bar�;a.ining uni.� ' having tl�e dui;ies aizd � esponsibilii:ies establislled by this � .l�r'Eicle. � The U�.�?IOi� sl�all notif�T i;he E1��1PL0�'�I� in �trrii:ing of the names of such UI�'ION REPP,i-SEi�jT1�TIV�S and .of i:heir successors � vrhen so desi_gnai:ec� as provided by 6. 2 0� i:ha.s �1G}.���i�ZE1�T, 7. 3 P�OCESSTITG OI�' A GRIEV�I\CE . . Xt i.s reco�zized and accepted. Uy i:lle Ul��zOi`7 and the E�ZPLCi�T tha�: . the processi.ng of �riev�nces as hex•einafter prvvi.ded is lixnited ' . by ihe jak� duia:es ��d responsibilities of tlie �MPLO�.'��S and a � shall iherei'ore Ue accompiished durin� norma.t �vor�in; hours .only � . when consisien� �vi.i:li such �Ml"'J�OY�E dul;i.es and resp�nsibilities. ' � The ag�ri.c�red ,112PLOY�E and a UNZOi� I��PR7�S�NTI�.TIV� shall Ue allo�vcd a reasonaUle amouiit of time �vithout loss in �ay �vlien a grievanec is inve �tit ated aiid preseiitc�d to the r11�TPLOY1�It clurin� n�ormal . �vc�r�:i�n� hours providcc] tha1: ihc '11�1I'L01T7� �nd thc �1NION . ��PItT:S�.;N'.CA'1'IVI� lizvc no+.ificd ai�cl rccci.ved tlic approval of , tl�c•c'.csi�;nitccl suZ�crvisor �vl�o h�is cletcz•mi.ncd tliat such abscnce i.s �•elso»1Llc ;liid tvoulcl not bc detri�ilcni<<l ta tlic �vo�•1: l�ro�raxn:s ot � tl�e Ll'[I'J�O'i'I�I;. 1 0 . . . , � . M .� « � ' � • � �, �� � ,1 . � � � . � . • • ,. � ' ' • 13 I , ' . 7. � X>>�C�C�;I�URT�; . . . . . , . . � '� • Gxaevanceu, as defiriccl 1�y Section 7. 1, shall. be resol.vecl in con- ' �oxznancc �vith ihc fol.la�vi.n� proccclure: ' ' �e � • Step 1, l�.n T�I47PLOYL� clai.min� a viol.a�ion concerning the � 'nter �rei;ati.on or a�lication of this .l),GIiT��11�NT s1ia.Il, r�ithi.n �. 1 I�l � i:tvents��one (21) calendzr days afier such aile�ed violai:ion has �� • oc�urred, pre �eni suc'li grievance to i:h� Ln7PLOi'I�;�'S superviso-r , � . . � as aesi�;nai:ed by tlie ]�n21.'LOYLR. The Ei�1PLOi'EI?-clesi�nated . ' " e tivzll di.scuss and 've an ansl=rer io such Step I. representat�.v �- . .•� • ' .�ri.evance 1T�ithin ten (l.0) calendar days after receipi:. 1� grievance , � �� no�: resol��ed in Step 1 and appealed io Step 2 sha11 be pl.aceci in � • . wri.ti.ng seit�ng forth i:he naiure of the ��rievance, i:he faci:s on '• which i�t is based, ihe provision or provisions of the .11GRE�1�'IEi\zT � � . al].e�edly violated, ihe remecly requested, ai�d shall be appealed fo � Step 2�vithin ten (�0) calendar da��s after i:he EIIZPLOY�R-desi�naied ' � . . . . . • xepresentativc!s firaal ans�ver in Step 1. Any �ri.eva.nce not appealec� � � . � in tvrii:in� to Siep 2 Uy the UI�'1:0i\7 �vi.i:hin ten (10) calenciar days shail � i � • . be consictered lvaived�. . � ' . . _ , SteP 2. Tf appeal�d, the �vritl.en grievai�ce shall Ue preseniecl by . I ' . ' • �• , �PLOY�I� -desi�fnated Sie � 2 ' . filae UI��InN and di.�cussecl �v�.th thc LA �, I . . . re resentative. The �nZPLUi'LR-clesi�nateci represeni:ative shall I � � . • , gi.vc il�c YINION tlie �M1�LOX�R'S Si:ep�2 ans�vcr i.n �vritin; within , �'I � ' � . . � ten (1�) c�lcncl�r clays aft�r rccc�pi: of such Stcp 2�;i'1CV�L2ICC. A . I. . . �� �a•i�ev�nec not resolved in Stcl� 2 may i�c �inl�c�llcd to Slep 3�vitliiil � � ' ten (10) c:ilciidar clays followxn�_;�ttic ,LR'i1�L01'l�li-dcci�mated i�cl�resicnfi- _ � � . . _ _ . . '�. - - ... .. . . . . . .. .. . . . . M�y . . ' . .• ,; . .. • • � � , • � . . • . �. . 1 .. � . • .. ' Ztive's �'i.n�l Stcl� 2 an ��ver. 1Lny �ricvance not ap�caled 1� J • r� .. ... . . . fn �vri.ii.n�; to Step 3 Uy tlie Y.lNIUN �vithi.i� tcn (10) calendar days � • shall l�c consicicred waivcd. , • � . . Si:ep 3. If appealccl, fi}le tivx•itien gri.evancc shall be presented � . , , bs� the Ui�TIOtiT ancl diseussecl �;�i.�h the E1,'IPLOI�R--designated � 3. e resentati.ve. Thc �,1�7PL0�'T�R -desi�naf.ed representai:ive ' Step r p � sllall �i��e the UNION tlle }�I1�PJ�0�.'.�.'R'S ans�ver i.n rvri.ti.n� tivithin � ten (J.0) calenc�ar days after recei.pt of such Step 3 gri.evance. A � t '- �v' il�in �rie�rance not resolved an Step 3 may be appea_ed t;o S�ep 4�. � ' . ie2� lU caleildar da s foll.o�ving the E1�IPLOXER--desi.�nai:ed � - . . . .i ) Y � � representative's final ans�=rer in Step 3. Any �rievance not app�aled i.n tivriti.��g �o Step 4 1�y the UI\ION �vi1:L�n ten (10) calendar days shall .' � � • � • ' • be considcred waived. - �.. Step �. 1�. grievance �lnresolved in Step 3 and appealeci � • �o Stcp � Uy i;he Ur.TTO1�T shall b� subinzt-ied io arUitrai;i.on subject � � '. � � . to ihe ��rovisions of fihe Public �mploymenl: Labor Relai:ions Act � .' �971. The seleci:ion of �an arbi�rai;or sliall be made in accordance . of �_. lvith �ilie ��Rul.es Go��erning il�e 1lrbitration of Gx•�evances" as esial�li.�hed � , . . . .. . . . � 13� the PuUli.c rnlployment l:clati.ons Poard. . . ' � . � . 7. 5 Alil�].Tli�l'l'C)r'S 1�.UTl:TC�liI`l'Y • ' . I� � ,�. '�'lic ai•Uitz�aior sliall h<<ve no ri��;lii i:o aincnd, maclify, nullify, �' � i�n�re, acicl ta, or suUiract from. thc tcr�.ns ancl cor�cliti.ons of • . � • �his AGPI ;J�n7LN'1'. • '.Clie ��i•Ui.t� aior �lizll eonsider anci cleeicle �� ' ,' ' ' . � ' • , •'., . ., � , , ' . - , , ° ^ J� , � : �� " , , . • • ' . 13 K ' only tlic �spCC11�.0 �.JJ1�C`;j �ut�mittccl in �vril:in� by thc �n�l'T�OX��I� � . � , .' . . . . . ' ' ' and t}�c 'UI�7ION, and sliall have no authority to �r�aice a decisi:on � . , � .. , , � � , � , on any oihcr issuc not so su}�mitted. . . ' . � �3. '�he arbitrai:or shall bc tivithout po�ver io make cle cisi.o:�s � . con�:x•�iry i:o, or inconsa.stent �vith, or xl�odifyi.n�; or varyi.ng �' ' � i.n anS� �vay tlle appli.cai:ion af lativs, rulcs, or re�;ul.ati.ons ' � hav�.ng the force and effect o� la�v. The arUi.traior's deci.si.on �hall � be suUzZiitted ii7 �vritin� �=ri.thin thirty (�0) days �'c�lloivinb close ' � � � � � of fihe heari.ilg or i:he siiUmiss�_on of b� iefs .Uy tl�e parti.es, � . ��rhicliever. ve later, unless {:he pari;ies a�ree 1:o an eatension. , _ . The decisi.on shall be Uindi.ng on bo�h i:he EiVII'LOYLR and the � � . � _ • . . � Ua�ION aild shall. be Uased solely on the arbitrai:or's interpret�.tion � ' �la. ation of �i:he e�: ress terms of fihis �.GR�LIVIEI�TT aizd ' or api c p . � .' to the facis of ih� grie�Tance presen�:ed. . .� C. The fees and e�penses for ihe arbiirai:or's services and � . � � , � �,, . - . proeeccti.ngs shall Ue borne equally by i:he TR21 LO�LI� a�ici � ,- the UNI01? provi.ded that eacli party sliall be responsible� for _ ..eompensafiing. its o�=rn representati.ves and �vi.tnesses. If ei_tl��r . �.' . � . . • pa�ty deszres a vcrUatim record of ihe proceedin�;s, i�i may � � � � �� eause such a record� to Uc made, pro��i.din� i1: pays �or the , � �, xecorcl, If Uoih parties dcsire a verUati:m record of the . I�. •. procecdin�s ihc cos1; sha�ll Uc sliai:ccl cr,ual.ly. ' ! � . . . . . , . . • �• - � ' . � ' . ' . ' . .� .. .. , . . . . . . , . . . s . � , . �. . . ... .� � � «�U- S _ - • ' � '. 7. G 1�V.�.IV I�:1� ' � �. w , . •. . If a�z�xevancc'is not presented �vithin the timc l.imita set ,� •� �'or. th auove, ii s}iall be considez ed "�vai.vecl. " If �1 grievance i.s not Zppe��led to fihe nc�i stci� �vi.f:hin tIie specifiecl i:ime limit oz any agrecd extension �hereof, iti shall Ue consi.clered se�.ticd c�r1 thc Uasis af �:lie �1��PL0�.'�R'S J.ast anstiver. If the �ItZPLO�).');P does not anslver a grievance or an appeal thereof wiilli.n �he specified ti_me lixnii:s, the UNIO\7 may elect to treat fihe gri.c��ance as deni.ed at that sfie� and immecliate].�T appeal tl�e grievance io ihe next step. `Tl�e iime l'imit i:n each step may Ue e�:i:ended by mutual �vriiien agreemenf of the i;R�IPLOYJ�R and fhe U1�7ION in each step. � � � � 7.7 CHOICI, OT' 1;L1\�T7�T�Y If, as a resull: of the tivrztten �It71'LO�.'T�R� response in Step 3, . ,. • the griev�ucc reznai.ns uizresolYTed, aiid if tlie �ri.evance ulvolves 0 13 � • the suspenszon, �dciTioi:ion, or discharge of an empl.oyee �vho has coinpleficci the required proUationary per. iod, the grie��ancE nza.y .be appeal.ed either to Step 4 of .fl.rtzcle VII or �i procedure � such as: Ci.vil Scrvi.ce, Vetei•an's Preference', or I� air �inplo��n�eixi:. If appealed• io any proceclurc other than St;ep 4 of Article VII fihe �;ri.evance is not suhjcct io fihe arUitz�ation proccdure as provicicid i.n Stcp 1 of 1�rti.cic ��TI. _�'l�e a��.;ricved emplc���ce shall indic�fi� i�� �vrifiin�;• wl�xcli proccd��rc is io Uc utili�cd-•-5i.cp 4 af 1lrticic �TII or ' . nnoilici• api�cal �n•occclurc--�u�d :;l��ll si;;�l 1 stlic�»c��i, to ihc clfccfi tl�1t tl�c ci�c�icc of :iny otlici• l�clrin�; �rccli�cics il�c .��;�;riet►ccl c�nplo��ce � � • - -� , , . . . • . . . .� . . , . . . . • -11- , . �. .' . I�� • .�rain inal:iil� u subscc�ucnt ap��cal tlirou�li Stcp � of .l�rticle VII. , . , , • . 13 M . . � . '' �' ' 1CT�T� �rIII SI�.VII�TGS CL/1_USJ� , . . �.� r ''� � '�'l�i.s I�GI�TTII�LN'T is subject to tlle la�vs of i.lie Uni.ted States, the Siatc of A'�inileso�a i.lI1C� tI1G Ci Ly of Fridl ey . In t�ie event any provision , I� �,.� � j� � � ar to law U a court of o f t h i s . A G]. � L� 1.� I� .[ s l l a l. l U e l i e l c l fi o b e c o n i. r y y '� • coilipetent jurisdici:ion fram ti�:�h�se final jucl,�,ment or decree no appc:al has ' ' been fal,cn ��ithin i:he time provicicc�, sucll provisions shal.l be vo�.ded. �.11 � , other p� ovisi.ons of tl.iis �Gli��i:TI;�TT shall coni;inuc in f.ull force ancl e�fect. � ' e rovi.sion ma � be rener�oi:iated at 1:1.ie �vritten request of cither party. �'he voxc3 d p � u .��� � . . � . • �1.I�'�ICT�r 7a S�NIOI�I'rY � 9. � Seniorii:y shall be detern�.ii�ed Uy the e�nployeets lengt�h of. � contiiluotis er�iplos�ment tivifli il�e Fire Department and posi:ed in � - ' . .. . an appropri.aie locai:ion. Seniority rosiers mas� be mainiainecl ; '' .'� � b the FIKE- CI�IEF - on the. basis of time in grade and time - . y j� . � within specific classifica�ions. � . � � . �J. 2 ]�uri.n�; tlle probaiionary perzod a netivly l�ired or re}iired cil�plo��ee � ' � xnay be dischar� ecl at ihc sole discreii.on of tlie �n�1PL01'LR. ; �•, Duri.nn thc rok�ai;i.onar � eri.ocl a pro;�loie�l Oi� reassi�ned employee ' � �, P S P . '� , n�ay be re�lzccd in his prcv�ous l�osition: at ihe sole di:�c;retion of th�e . . � �117PLOS'�12. . • . i � • : �J. 3 �l1 rcciucti.on of ���orl: forcc �vi.11 Uc acconzplisllcd an the U:�sis � � . . . . I � . ' • of senioz•ity. � • � ' �I' � . • � . I�• . . . • . . , , . , , ,, . � . � , . , . . � �•�2- ,� Employees shall be recalled from layoff on the basis of seniority. An employee on iayoff shall have an opportunity to return to work '� within fiwo years of the time of his layoff before any new employee is hired. � 9,4 Vacation neriods to a max�mum of two (2) weeks shall be selected on �� the basis of seniority until May lst of each calendar year. � ARTICLE X DISCIPLINE i0.1 The E�IPLOYER will discip�ine employees for just cause and may be in �ii in one or more of the followin f� orr.�s. � a} oral reprimand; b) written reprimand; c� suspension; d) demotion; or e) discharge. 10.2 Susoensions, demotions and discharges will be in a�ritten form. 10.3 �r�ritten reorimands, notices of sus�ens.ion, and notices of discharge which are to become part of an emoloyee's nersonnel file shall � be read and acknowledged by si�nature of ti�e employee. Employees ap�-�be-�P1�8P1 wiil receive a copy of such reprimands and/or notices. 10.4 Employees may examine their own individua� personnel files at reasonable times under the direct supervision of the EMPLOYER. � 13 N ..�3.. �. � ,• �8.5--��se�kK�es-�z-��-�e-r���ee-c�e�lE��-��-�r-�'�.�e-{a�-c�a�-st�ie�t�-iorr�t�kt��ot�� i3 0 . ' ,,.• .' � • � ' , • , . . , ' -�z�� . . , • • I � • _� �O..G--�x���I���> wi��-a�ai���-c}t�-e�;��-c�x�e�-E-c�ee��.�u��-���w�s�r�a�z-c�x-ef- ' . ck-�e�i�3l-i�-�y -a e� �a �- H�i�e :�} -i�i-e- �c�z�}kc}�}e e-h�.s- �n -�x�r err �.rr � ortarrits- �:o- }�rve -� -�E1�K)�x -re pr-c.�-cn t�t ti ve -prc�rE- -�r� suL:h �nesi.xonin�r, �8: �'-°�riev�nr�es-r�ia�tin� to-tliz-�: :f�rtic�c-sha��'ne-z�'r�I.��.�;�z3'��'�:'ie - iaPXI-����3�-�-�e.{�-�-U�-�3e-g��e��TZ-�-�ee-N��f}e�ec�r�i�e-�H7c}e�-A-� t-�rl�e-�F�-I:- 0 .l��i •'F��-T���- ���- - � Fh� �'I'�'�'�'�'3 E3�?�� ��-s ��R�Q 3� E'�� E3i'� - ��-n��e3�.�.r,�.slaa��-����-�Y�F-��g�-i�s-g���x�t-ct� fi�z�r?�-e��i�i�s-h� ��ie-�3-i�ri�-�t�i.-e-s-- , , a�i�r� ]�'�i.7�re�rr�a S�a-�e-�n�st�tzrt�.r.�rrs; � . - .1�1��rzcr�E XI. ���ORI� SCI�TEDIIL� 11.1 The work week schedule for all employees of the Fire �epartment shall constitute a five.day., sixty hour work . week. The Department I-Iead is responsible for scheduling and assigninb the i,reek].y work schedule. . :i1,2 The City clainis the authority to schedule employee's work.' ' A normal work day for employees shall be twelve (12) hours' bet►aeen 8:00 P.r4. and 8:00 A.M. The normal tiaork week shall � con�mence at s:00 P.�4, on Sunday and ,shall end at 8:00 A.�i. on Friday. � : 11.3 It is recognized by the parties that service to the public' may require the establishment of regular shi£ts £or some ' employees on a daily; weekly, seasonal, or annual Uasis ' other than thc 8:00 P.M. ta 8:00 A.r1. s}iift. The employer ' will give advance notice to the employees �ffected by tlie' • establisl�ment of work aays diffcrent than the normll emploiyces' work ci�y. � � � . ' � I � � -za- i1.4� Tn the event that wark is rec�uired because of unusual cir- 13 P cumstances such as (Uut not limited to) fire, flood, snow, sleet, breakdown of munici.pal equipment or facilities, no I' � es need be iven. Tt is not advance notice to the employe g 11.5� •� . ARTICLE XII � %12.1 � � required that an emplayee c�orkiiig otlier than the normal workday be scheduled to work more than twelve (12) hours; however, cach employee has an obligation to work overtime if,re- quest�d, unless unusual circumstances prevent him from doing so. It is also recognized by the parties that service to the puUlic may require the establishment of regular work week� that schedule work on Saturdays and/or Sund.ays. Employees who are regularly sclieduled to be on duty Satur3ay and/or Sunday will be granted two consecutive days off in lieu of Saturday and/or Sunday. V1lCAT I ONS Each Employee of the City who has worked regularly for the C�.ty for a period o£ not less than tti.relve (12) successive months 'is �entitlec3 to a vacation away from employm°nt with pay. Vacation � pay shall he computed at the regular rate of pay to which such F.mployee is �ntitled. An Employee who has worked a minimum 'of twelve (12) months is entitled to one (1) workday o� �vacatio�n �or eac}i 1110I1t}1 so worked. An Employee who has worked eighty- four'(84) consecu�ive months is entitled to�one and one-half (1'�) workdays of vacation f.or cach month worked beginning �vith the eighty-f��t}� (35th} month o� consecutive employmcnt. An . • Empl.oyee wlio has worked o:�c hundred eighty (180) successive ;months is entiticd to one and t�ao-t}iirds (1 2/3) workdays of vacatian � ior eacll montli t��rked, Uefiinnin�; �aitlt thc one hu�idred eighty- first (181st) month of consecutive emp�.oy��enr, Except wher� . . � I � � � � . 12.2 � � i � 13 Q ' otherwise provided by agreement between the City Managcr and :. Employee, no more than twenty (,20) days vacation may be taken , in any.one cal.endar year, and the vacations, unless otherwise provided, shall be taken each year during the months of April to aiid including the month of August. Employees are not authorized to carry over from one year to the next.more than five (5) days of vacation over what the . employee had at the end of the pxevious year, without express �•approval of his Departm�nt Head and the City 1�4anager, 12.3 In the event a regular full time Employee quits or his � ARTICLE XIII 13,1 Pay for off duty fire calls shall be $5.00 oer fire call, This will apply on ' all fire calls before or after regular working hours or on days off. Shoul',d the courts find that the Fridley Fire Department comes under t{�e jurisdictiion � of the federal Fair Labor Standards .Act, this section of the contract shall � employment. is severed for any reason whatsoever, he shall receive his earned vacation pay. PAY FOR FIRE CALLS be null and void. RTICLE %�IV EtiIPLOYEE EDUCATION PROGRAti� 14.•1 The City tivill pay certain expenses for certain education courses � based on the following criteria. � a. � b. ' . ,� 14.2 The training course must have relevance to the employees" present or anticipated.career responsibilities. AttendaMCe �hall be at a City approved institution�. The course muslt be approved by the Departme�nt EIead. • ' Financial assistance will be extened only to courses off�red by an accredited ins�itution. This ineludes vocltional scl�ools, Tti�ii�csota Scliool of I3usiness, c�c. Programs Financi�l Poliey e extencci to cover onl thc cost bf � � � � I � �J w1G_ . . '13 R tuition, Charges for books, s.tudent union members}iip, student • healtli coverage and other charges for which the student receives some item or service other than actual instruction will not be paid. The City will pay SOa of the cost of tuition iri advan�e of the e;nployee's actual participation in the course and thej e�nploye° whall pay SOa of the cost. Employee upon successful completion of the course will be required to present to his department head a certification of satisfactory work. Satis�ac- tory �aork is defined as follows: a. In courses issuing a letter g�ade,a C or above is requir�d. b. In courses issuing numerical grade, a 700 or above is � .. . �. . required. . . . . �I ' � c. In courses not i.ssuing a grade, a certification from the instructi_on that the student satisfac�orily participated � in the act'ivities� of the courses as required. 14.3 If the employee satisfactorily completes the course,he will be reimbursed for the additional 50� of the tuition cost for � which he had obligated himself in the approved application. , If the employee fails to satisfactorily complete the course, he ' � ; " will not be reimbursed. . . � , �]4.4 �,Tlie �rogram �aill not reimburse the employee for the hours he � spend i:� class, only for t}ie tuition. • . �, i 14.5� Expenses for wliich the employee is compensated under some � � other educational or assistance �rogram will not be.covered, I � ' such as the GI bill. • 14.6.� The City will not pay tuition or other costs for those cour5es ' � which are used to make tl�e employee eligible for aclditional salary. � _ .. �. � _��_ � 13 S I lARTICI,1: XV }IOLIDAYS 15.1 Holiclays includc New Ycar's Day, Jan�aaxy I; Washington's and I, Lincoln's Birthda , the third Monday in February; 1�9cmorial �ay, � Y . � the last rfonday in �7ay; Independe�ce Day, July 4; Labor Day, L-}ie iirst A9onday i�i Septe;nb�r; Christopher ColumUtis Day, the sec��ld �, r4onday in October; Veterans Day, the fourth Monday in Octobci, • ' Thanksgivin� Day, the fourth Thursday in November; and � � � Christmas Day, Decembcr 25; provided, when Ne�a �'ear's Day, January l, or Independence Day, ,T:ily 4; or Christmas Day, �ec�mber 25, falls on Saturday, the preceding day shall be . a holiday. �ARTICLE X�/i SICK LEAVE - � . � ,, 15.1 Any employee who is unabl.e to iaork because of sickness or � . . ".;.`,°..: injury may obtain a leave of absence upan notice to the Cit�T. � .' Written verificati_on of his condition by a competent medical � � � •. . l � , � authority may be reQuired. Where the condition of the Employee is such that he,is unable to act for himself, �he Union may apply for such leave of absence in his behalf. Failure to notify the City suUjzcts the employee to appropriate . . discipline by the.City. ' � •� 16.2 Each employee of the City who has wor�ced regularly for the City for a period not no� less than �t�aelvc (12) successive months is entit�ed to sick leave away from employment with pay. Siok leave pay shall be computed at the regular rate of pay to which such employee is entitled. An employce who � has worked a minimum of twelve (12) months is entiticd to a»e (1) clay of sick leave £or eacl� month worked, cumulative to one hunar�a twenty (120) da'ys of' s ick lcave .� After onc hunclrcd • .� � � ' -18- � � twenty (120) earned and unused.days oi sick leave have accumulated, one (1).day adclitional vacation shall be grani:ed . to an emplo.yce for every three (3) sick leave days earned , and unused. T}�e employee may elect, aftex ninety (90) earned a�id unused days of sick leave have accumulated, to receive ' one (1) day additional vacation for every thre� (3) sick I� leave d.ays earned and unused. Sick l.eave days shall not 0 accumulate bcyond one hundred twenty (120). Before any sick leave compensation is paid, the City�may request and is entitled to receive from any e;:.pl.oyee who has been absent :13T more than three (3) days in succession, a certificate signed by a competent physician or other medical attendant certifyirig to the fact that the absence was�in fact due to sickness and' not otherwise. The City also reserves the right to have an examination made at any time of any persan claiming absence ' by reason of sickenss; such examination may be made when the City deems the same reasonably necessary to verify the sickn�ss '.�. claimed, and may be made in behalf of the City by any comp°terit. ' person designared by the City. � ' � . . � ' RTICLE ;(VII INJiI]'.Y ON J013 : � 17.1 Any full time City employee who has been employe3 by the City � at l.east six (6) manths, injured on his x�egular job, sha11 be � � � � entitled to full pay up to a period of ninety (90) days while , I � I he 1S �bSC12� from iaork by reason of such injury and his accr�ued . sick leave will nor be charged ur�til a£ter and beginning �.�it�h the ninety-first (91st� day of absence from work by reason of such injury; pravided, howcver, the amount ot any compensati�on sliall Ue reducecl Uy any paymc�it reccived by the injured cmployec . , ' � � � ARTICLE XVI 18.1 ARTICLE XI y � � � � � . � � I � � ' � •19- from 4rorkmen's compensation insurance, An employee who claims an absence from work due to an injury susta�ned on his regular job is subject to an examination to be made in behalf of the City by a person� competent to nerform the same and as is designated by the City. PR06ATIONARY PERIODS A11 ne�vly hired or rehired employees wili serve a six (6) months probationa ry period, FUNERAL PAY 13 U 19.1 In case of death occurring in the im:ediate family of an em,�loyee, such an employe? may be excused from a�ork for up to three days with additiqnal time off granted by the City Manager if additionai time is needed. This time off shall not subject the employee to loss of pay. For this purpose, members of the immediate family of the employee are considered to be the following: spouse, child (natural or adopted), parent, grandparent, brother, sister, monther-in-law or father-in-law. ARTICLE XX. JURY PAY 20,1 It shall be understood and agreed that the City shall pay all regu7ar • full time employees serving on any jury the differen�e in sala ry betw�een jury oay and his regular salary or pay while in such service. ARTICLE XXI UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 21.1 The City shall provide a uniform clothing. allowance for Firefighters of One Hundred Seventy Five Dollars ($175) per year as needed, with the understanding that the One llundred Seventy Five Dollars ($175) will not be drawn in cash, but is to be used solely for the purchase of uniforms. . . . � . . ... . , . . � � - �-� . I � . . _2p_ � `, • 13 V � � • ART.ICLE XXII IIEAI.TI1 /1ND llOSPI'I'AL INSUI2/1NCIs ' ', 22,7. qegular !`ull time Employees shall xeceive the same coverage �s � , � �� � , ' ' . '� . other City rmployees, which policy at the present time provi�les that the City pays for the Employee's i�ealth and Hospital Insurance, and that the Employee pays for dependent coverage!, except tiiat the Cii:y will pay the first Fifteen Dollars ('�.15_.00) , � per month towards dependent coverage. The City also provide:s ' li�e insurance equal to annual salary, eJith a maximum of Ten Thousand Dollars (�10,000). The City also provides additional • , � AD $ D insurance equal to salary, tivith a maximum of Ten �houisand Dollars ($10,000). 22.2r A representative from the Employee group shall be included on a committee which makes recommendations on the content of specificatians for any ne�� policy. Such recommendations ara subject to Council approval. � ARTI CLE XXI I I PAY F�1R I NSPECTIQN � � � , 23�i There may be a need from time to time for temporary inspection personnel in the City. It is agreed between the Union and the City that should the Fire Chief elect to use one of the Firefighters as an inspector, the oay shali be Four pollars and Sixty Five Cents ($4,65) per hour. It is understood that the rate of oay for inspection shall not be re7ated in any way to the rate for reguiar or overtime pay, as shown elsewhe re in this contract. There shall be no overiime pay for inspection work, The ! , Fire Chief has the riqht to use votunteers as inspectors, Should the courts find that the Fridley Fire Department comes under.the jurisdic�ion � of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, this section of the contract halil � � � , be null and void. . , . ' -� -zi - � � � � ' � 13 W � � � tz•rlr.r,r yxrv �in•rl:s o�� 1>nY 24.1 Firefighters . � 1975 i I� I�irst six months $937 per month _ �lft-er six mo�itlis $9f36 per r,�onth ', A�ter 1'-i ycars $1,038 ner month '� �1fL-cr 2 2 years $],092 per month � After 3 z yea-rs $1,150 ner montl� � . ' r 24. 2 F� re Capta i r. 3,975 .-�-_- , . � - $1,225 per month �RTICLE XXti/ Al)DITIOZT I. A INC�NIIVE PAY �� 25,1 Incentive pay ti,�ill be paid over and above ihe standard base .. ra.te or going rate for Employees hired �rior to January l, 1974 ` according to the fol�oiaing schedule, providing empl�ye�s have , made demonstrable progr°ss towarcis im�roving their proficiency •, fox thcir particular joh t�.tle or job assignment. � , 1"975 . llfter S years of service $24 � ' After 10 ye�rrs of service �48 , : After 15 years of service $72 � . � I . � . . .. . . 1 . �� . . . 1 � .. . 1 . � f • ' . .. 'i . .. r� .. . .. -22_ . . . 13 X r � � ..� AR'fICLE :;XVI COLLI;GF CR�DT'S'S ' 26.1 For Fire Fight�rs hired after January 1,. 1974 the City.►�ill pay for education credits earned at an accredited institution of'. , high�r learnin� at the rate of �.40 per quarter credit � e starting ��ith the ninety-first (91) quarter credit up to a maximum of �one hundred eiglity (180) credits or a maximum of � $�G.00 per month. All courses taken must be approved by the � Employer. No Fire Fighter hired after 3anuary 1, 1974 will be eligible for payments under ARTICLE XXVI. No Fire Fighte�r � �will draw both additional incentive pay under ARTICLE XXVI ' �and pay for education credits. Employe�s �aill not be eligible ' o- u ' n e' d'� 'r ix month robationar f �. ed cat�o cr dlts urinb thei s (6) p � � period. A determination of the number of credits an employe� . is eligible for �aill be made on December 1, of the previous � year. Credits earned during the year will not be counted � until the succeeding year. The City �aill not pay tuition for • • courses that Employee �aill later be paid for as noted above. . � , . . - ARZ'I �LE Y.,t�lI I . SE1�EI:ANCE PAY � � ' � � .27.1 Any Employec with forty-�eight (_48) or more consecutive months ' � 1, of employmeiit will receive severance pay in cash based on one and onc-hzlf (1'2) days for each twelve (12) consecutive ' ' manths workect, but nat to excccd thirty (30) days of the same. m i ' ' . .. . f, , �-23- ' � . ' ' 13 Y � XXVIII � . I�RTICLE_ .1V�1IVI=R . . . - . , � 23.1 " An�� �ncl all prior a�rcemcnts, resalutions, practices, � policies, z•ules and re�ulations z•egardin� i;erms and eoncliti.ons � . � . . . . • oi ci»ployment, to the extei�t incansistent �vith the provi.sions , of tliis 1�GPI�rI��TN�i', are hereUy stipercedecl. � ,. 23.2 'rl�e parties mutually ackno���led��c. ihai: d«rzng ihe ne�oiiati.ons '�� ' �vhich resultcd i.n this 11.GI�T�LTVILN'1', each 31ad the unlimi.ted � .�. � • � ri hi: antl o orl;unii: to mal:e cleTnands and ro osals �vi.i;h - � PP Y P P ` respect to ans� terin or coi�dition of employmeni: not reinoved � � by la��� from bar�;aining. All agrcements and understandings : ��� • arri.ved at by i:he pari:ies are set forth �n r���r. itinb in this � AGRELI�ZLI�'r for i:he si:i� �ulated duraiiori of ihi.s AGRE�11'17�\T. 1 , � The ENPL.01'T�;l� and �he UNION eacli voluntari�y� and unqualifiedly �� waives i:he right -io meet and negotiai;e rebardin�; any and all zcrms � � • . and c�nditions of employ�nent refer. red to or covered in ihis � � Au���l�7 �I�T or wii:h respect to anS� tez m or concli.tion of �� ' employment not specifically referred i:o or covered by ihis . . . '� �1,G1Z�1�11�1J�i�?'.i', evcn 1;hough such i:e� ms or condii:i.ons maST not �� � . . � .. . . . . ' . . - have Ueen �vithin the Icno�vl.edge or coni:emp�ation of eiihcr or , bofi.i of the p�tri.i.cs at tlie tiinc i:his coni:r•act �vas ncgotiai:rcl or . � executed. • ' • . .•� ' . , , . ' . . � . � ' . . . , . , , . ' • • . '�, . . . . ' • . ; . .: , . . • - . . , . , , , , ., . �� , . . ,� ! , „ . . �. � .�i..: . .... . . , . .... . . . . . . ' , '13 Z ■. ,. _ . • -24- ' RTIC'LE X;{IX DURATION I � � his AGRI�ErSENT shall be effective as of the January 1, 1975 _ and sliall emai'n in fuZl foi•ce and eifect until the thirty-first day oi December, ,197� �,In �itness whereof, the parties hereto have executed this AGREE�4ENT on ; i thi,s �J day of , 197�. ' ' , � . ' - �ITY OF rRIDLEY . . � �AYOR - '.�ILLIA�1 J. NEE � .. . . ' i lIZ � . . . � ' ' . • • ' FOR T�IE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION UI' FIRE FIGHTERS LOCAL N0. 1986 ' � � � � � � �/11-2��Y�-. � l�sn��r�x.� , HJ!J.4RD '�, sir��vso� � . . . �I .' '�. � --� � • ' . . _ � . G4RY E . L�AR��S. , - � , � � � i ; DENNIS P1. OTTEPI . . ' I her�eU recommend to the City Council approval Y o� th',i's �greement . � ' .. �,���,���,r � . � , ASS�f, CITY ��1GR./FIy. QIR, - t1,�RUIP� C. aRUNSEL! � , 0 '. t 1 /�% �1��'/ :��',�/�'% 1 i � T0: e � M MAYOR WILLIAM NEE AND FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS o FROM: HAROLD BELGUM, CNAIRMAN, HUD1AN RELATIONS COMMITTEE � � , � DATE: MARCH 5, 1975 - � � After a time of apathy, during which it was difficult even to bring ' � out a quorum, the Human Relations Committee has become quite intereste:'. � in the idea of promoting some kind of "Fridley Festival of Nations" to o celebrate the idea that diversity is o�r strength and connec� this with � W the coming Bicentennial in some way. Z z I suggest that the membership of the corranittee be increased to � thirty with a quorum of ten and that the rigid restrictions for membership ' J be dropped and replaced by the idea of ethnic group representation. If o ethnic minorities are to be recognized and expected to participaie they ' LL must have membership on the planning committee. � It is an old rule of organization that coordination must begin at �' the beginning of an organized process. The number thirty would allow , = for the inclusion of most of our ethnic minority groups. � o Could this matter be considered at your March 10 meeting? 7hanks ' z for your cooperation and interest. w � z w , > . Q >- F- N , � w � Z � � � • , � w F- Z w U i � � � 1 '14