Loading...
05/14/1979 - 00013830r THE MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF MAY 14, 1979 The Public Hearing Meeting of the Fridley C�ty Council was called to order, after the Board of Review Meeting, at 9:30 p m. ROLL CALL. � MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT: ADOPTION OF AGENDA �' � Mayor Nee, Councilman Fitzpatrick, Councilwoman Moses, Councilman Schneider and Councilman Barnette None The agenda was adopted as subm�tted. PUBLIC NEARINGS � DNG DBA ORIENTP MOTION 6y Councilman Schneider to waive reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vote, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the pu6lic hearing opened at 9•30 p.m. Mr. Brunsell, City Clerk, stated the report from the Police Department tndicates there �s no ev�dence of any police problems and the Police �epartment could see no reason for denial of this license. No persons in the audience spoke for or against the issuance of this license. MOTION by Councilman Moses to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a votce vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hear�ng closed at 9 32 p.m PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ISSUANCE DF ON-SALE NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE TO PATRICK G. KOLB DEBA. PAKOLLY'S PIZZA AT 7893 EAST RIVER ROAD: MDTION by Councilman Fitzpatr�ck to waive the reading of the pu�lic hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a vo�ce vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously, and the publ�c hearing openc�d at 9:32 p.m. Mr. Brunsell, City Clerk, stated the Police Department made an investigation of the premises and finds no reason for den�al of the license Gouncilman Fitzpatrick stated, in all the years they were talking about this property _rnd development of it, he never heard any reference for a pizza parlor with a beer license He stated he had no objection to the appllcant regarding the beer license, but it does disturb him to have that business at th�s particular location �Jo person in the audience spoke for or against the issuance of this license. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schne�der Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 9 34 p m. FINAL PLAT. P.5 6661, 71, 81 MAIN STREET N.E. Y PARK ADDITION BY ALVIN A. NITSCHKE MOTION by Councilwoman Moses to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Barnette Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee dec7ared the motion carried unanimously. Mr,Sob�ech, Public Works Director, stated this hearing �s to revtew the final plat for property at 6661, 6671, and 6681 Ma�n Street Fle stated the Planning PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 14, 1979 PAGE 2 Commission held a public hearing and has recommended approval of the plat. Mr. Sobiech stated, originally, the property developed into a multiple rental situation and Mr, Nitschke intends to plat the property into lots which would then be owner-occupied. (=ir. Sob�ech stated, since this was an existing situation, and there was nothing in the code regulating existing structures, the staff likened this to a townhouse development and proceeded on that basis. He stated, in this case, the plan has been constructed and now exists and the City would have to concern themselves with the platting of the property Nir. Sobtech stated the original recommendation 2f the Planntng Commission Vias for approval based on the platting of the property He stated what �s shown on the map is «ctuall, three lots in one block. Cach lot would consist of a portion of the structure, a garage and then the ad�acent properties. Flr Sobtech stated at the Plamm �g Commission meeting on April 18, 1979, there was discussion on the townhouse proposal. In light of that discussion, the Planning Commtssion recommended that the property under the ex�sting dwellinqs become pr�vate ownership and the rest of the land become ground held in common. Mr. Sobeich stated the staff and C�ty Attorney feel this could be handled either way because once it is platted, the legal description would be for structures and certain properties. hle stated, etther way, there would have to be by-laws, filed as covenants, that would take into account certain items whether it be from ma�ntaining the structures, down to the utilit�es. He stated an association would he formed consisting of owners of the property, but i m tially it would probably be set up by the present owner at this time, Mr. Nitschke. Counc�lrnan Fitzpatrick questioned once the by-7aws were set up, what about control as far as the City was concerned. Mr. Herrick, City Attorney stated, generally speaking, 6y-laws can be altered by a certain percentage of the property owners. He stated where you are dealing with only three property owners, you would probably want to make it unam mous for any changes. He felt, in this particular situation, the Counctl should make the approval contingent upon approval of the in�tial by-laws, Mr. Herrick felt this may beanarea that the City could be dealing with that may happen frequently, where owners of rental properties decida to "condominiumtze". He felt the City may be faced with similar requests in the future from people who own larger untts and stated be discussed this with staff to some extent, and they felt they had adequate ordinances to cover the sttuation. ' Councilman Schneider asked tf this was the same process they would be considering for condominiums. Mr Herrick stated, at this stage, the City doesn't have any experience wtth such requests, and unless some new legislation is adoptedhe would think it would be the same process as for condominiums. P1r. Sobiech stated this ent�re area of rev�sing existing rental property is being reviewed by the Planning Comnnssion. Mr. Sobiech felt, in his own mind, that if there was an apartment situatton with stories of dwelling units, he d�dn't believe it would satisfy the requirements of the townhouse or condominium development, as compared with units in a townhouse design where iots and 6locks can 6e simply described, and common property can be seen. He felt, w�th apartments you have a diffi cult time identifyin9 what is common property. Mr. Herrick stated he would concur with P�r. Sobtech's comments and that with an apartment, you have a d�fferent style building. , , � 1 PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 14,1979 PAGE 3 Counc�lman Fttzpatr�ck stated his concern is that whatever interest the City has in this, it seems would be addressed in the by-laws which would be far from stable because they could be changed. , Mayor Nee stated he felt a little uneasy with it and perhaps a preceder.t would be set and was not sure it has been thought through enough. He felt part of the premise of setting up a townhouse development area was to have a fairly large development area to insure pro`essional maintenance. , Mr. Sobiech stated one reason staff felt confortable going this way is that there was some crtteria in the code for guidance He stated the only item in question was the area, and he felt thts requirement was originally set up to allow perhaps for recreational uses. Mr. Quresht, City Manager, questioned if there were other situations tn the City where a similar approach could be taken Mr. Sobiech tndicated there were several and pornted out some of them. Mr. Sobiech stated another way to approach this would be to rezone to single family and then have "0" lot lines. Mr. Sobiech felt with the present R-3 zoning, townhouses are allowed and the only criteria you have to satisfy is the square footage per unit, which is the case here. Mr. Quresh� stated there are certa�n restrictions the Council can impose which they feel are necessary to maintatn the integrity of the development. Mr. Herrick stated they could possibly obtain additional information through the League or the C�ty of Minneapolis, as they have had a lot of converstons. He stated one point he would like to make is that covenants, as such, are not enforceable by the City, but the property owner can enforce them. Mr. Qureshi stated, ds far as the townhouse development, the Council could ' impose restrtcttons that could be part of the approval. Mr. Herrick stated this could 6e done, however, the question is if i'c would be binding on the property owners. Mr. Sobtech stated in the Innsbruck North development, the City had an agreement that was bind�ng on the original developer and the C�ty would have the right to enforce the developmental agreement Counc�lman Schnetder felt, however, with the Innsbruck North development, each of these units were paying someth�ng into a central fund to maintain the land and exter�or. Mr. Nitschke stated he fa�ls to understand why one situation would work and one wouldn't, ,7ust qecause this �s a smaller number of units. He stated, as far as maintenance of the property, he felt ihe City would have as much control through the City codes and ordinances as they do w�th single family residences. He felt, however, if you had an absentee landlord possibly the property wouldr�'t be maintained as well and thinks, in the ma�ority of the situations, that certainly would be the case. Mr. Nitschke stated he didn't feel uncomfortable with any of the by-laws he has seen, Is was his understanding that the covenents are binding to all the owners. Mr Nitschke stated the um ts are all fi m shed separately now and felt they would remain the same. He stated he didn't see any � problems with anything that has been d�scussed. Counctlman Fitzpatrick stated one of the points that has come up is comparison to the single family residences and felt it was a matter ofi impact. He stated it is true if you buy a home in the middle of a block, you are impacted by your neighbors, but certainly not anything of this degree. He felt they should keep �n mind that they also have to think in terms of other requests of simtlar nature and aren't talking particularly about Mr. Nitschke and his situation. Mayor Nee stated he would feel more comfortable if they had some guidelines. I PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 14, 1979 PAGE 4 Mr. Sobiech felt, with the Planning Commission's review, they may be coming up with some recommendat�ons. Councilwoman Moses stated she would compare the two where this would be separate owners, each taking care of their property, as compared to a townhouse development, where the upkeep is taken care of. Councilman Schneider stated he was more concerned about a precedent being set, rather than �ust this particular piece of property. Mr. Qureshi, City Manager, suggested obtaim ng additional information and to , develop some type of guidelines. MOTION by Councilwoman Moses to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried una m mously and the publtc hearing closed at 10:12 p.m. Mayor Nee stated that staff will brinq this item back when they have addttional information and will advise Mr.fJttschke when it comes back to the Council. PUBLIC HEARING ON STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ST. 1978- P10TION by Councilman F�tzpatrick to waive reading of the public heartng notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vote , all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the meeting carried unanimously and the public hear�ng opened at 10 13 p.m. Mr. 5obiech, Public Works Director, stated th�s is a hearing on the final assessment cost for the 1978 street improvement pro,7ects. Mr. Herrmann, City Assessor, explained how the assessment is figured for corner lots. Mr. Sobiech stated, in the Hyde Park area, improvements were made on 2nd , Street, 2-%z Street, 3rd Street, 57th Place, 58th Avenue, 59th Avenue, 60th Avenue, several alleys in Blocks 9 and 22 of the Hyde Park Addition and Main Street from 58th to 61st and 57th Avenue fr�m Main Street to 3rd Street. Mr. Sobiech stated the front foot assessment for the street and concrete curb and gutter was $17.04 a front foot and the side yard assessment was $5.37 per foot. The front foot rate for the alleys was $3.57. �line sewer services were put in the Hyde Park Addition at a cost of $?76.47 per service. �lain Street from 58th to 61st was put in under ST. 1978-2 with commercial property pay�ng the full cost per foot for bituminous street surfacing and concrete curb and gutter and resident�al and park property heing assessed at normal residential rates, w�th the balance being paid from State Aid Funds ihe frant foot assessment for tndustr�al and commercial property is $22.47 and for residential property, $17.04. Mr. Sobiech stated 57th Avenue from Main to 3rd Streets w�s assessed for curbing only on the Narth s�de of the street under tmprovernent pro�ect ST. 1978-4 The front foot assessment rate for commercTal property is $9.59 a front foot and for residenttal property with double frontage, $2.40 a front foot. In the Alice Wall Addition on 63rd Avenue and 7th Street, �vater ana sewer services were put in under pro,7ect ST. 1978-1 at a cost of b257.94 for the water and �242.00 for the sevaer per service. Mr. Sabiech stated with the improvement on 53rd Avenue, East of Central ' 6etween Menard's and Skywood Mall, the front foot assessment was $27.71. He stated this improvement was needed to improve the trafftc flow and signali- zation. On the University Avenue West Service Road, which generally abuts the House of Lords property, the frorrtfoot assessment ratc was $45.74. Mr. Sobiech stated water and sewer lines and water services were put tn East Ranch Estates Third Addition on Main Street, as petitioned by the property owners, at a cost of $4,019.98 for the water line of Lot 4 and a cost of $�,511.28 per lot for the sewer line. Cost of the two water services was $323.22 per service. i PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 14, 1979 PAGE 5 Mr. Sobiech stated on 79th Way this ts a State Aid Street designed to State aid standards. The front foot assessment for commercial propert�es was $24.23 and $17.04 for res�dential properties. Only curbing was installed on a portion of 79th bday which involved commercial property and the front foot rate was $9.57. Mr. Sobiech stated, under pro,7ect ST. 1978-2, sidewall; only was installed on the East side of 7th Street from 61st to 63rd Avenue He stated this improve- � ment was pet�tioned for by School District �'14 and the City agreed to share in the costs. The front foot assessment �s �5J0. Under pro,7ect 1978-4, Central Avenue from 76th to Osborne Road had curb and gutter installed on the East side only at a front foot rate of $7.19 and a side yard rate of $ 81per foot. Main Street from 57th Avenue to I-694 had curbing installed only and the front foot rate was $7.5E. No persons in the audience spoke regarding these assessments. MOTION by Counc�lman Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the publ�c hearing closed at 10-22 p.m PUBLIC HEARING ON IMPRO�EMENT: STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ST. 1979-1 MO'fION by Councilwoman Moses to waive read�ng of the publtc heartng notice and open the hearing. Seconded by Councilman Fitzpatrick. Upon a voice vote, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unantmously and the public hearing closed at 10:24 p.m. Mr Sobiech stated the City received a petit�on from property owners requesting improvement of this alley. Preliminary Assessment Estimates tndicate an , improvement cost of �3 J5 a foot. He stated the only problem staff fias with this is that it is proposed that only a portion of the alley be improved or that part whtch is actually betng used. He stated residences to the North do have access off of ad,7acent streets. Mr. Sob�ech stated, in the past, �t has been the policy to improve all of the alley and would f�nd it diffi cult to maintain alleys if they don't have ingress and egress in 6oth directions to accommodate the equipment the City has to ma�nta�n them. Mr. Sobiech stated, in this particular case, the equipment could only proceed in one direction and there would be no place to store snow. He stated this was mentioned to the petitioner and it seems there has been arrangments made, in the past, for plowing and in this part�cular case, the plowing could continue on that basts, however, the City would maintain it as far as any repairs. Mr. Robert Hartman stated he was the owner of three apartments between 59th and 60th and has talked to the ad,7acent property owners and everyone, with the exception of one person, is interested in having th�s alley blacktopped. Mr. Hartman stated they now have someone �ome in to do the plowing, and hoped some of the property owners would work wtth him on that, but that he would be receptive to continuing to have the alley plowed � A gentleman from the audience stated he owns a huilding �n this area and the driveway �s blacktopped now and quest�oned how the tmprovement would affect this. Mr. Qureshi, C�ty Manager, stated the City would work with him on the design. No other persons in the audience spoke for or aga�nst this �mprovement. PUBLIC HEARING MEETING OF MAY 14, 1979 PAGE 6 MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatr�ck to close the public heartng. Seconded by Councilwoman Moses. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried una m mously and the publtc hear�ng closed at 10 35 p.m. NEW BUSINESS RATION OF A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING ASS � I Mr. Sobiech, Public Works �irector, stated he received a call from a property owner who owned a 40 fo�t lot and when they made this improvement, water and sewer services were put in to make sure they wouldn't have to tear up the street in the future. He stated some services were put on the 40 foot lots that could be combined with other lots in order to make it a builda6le site. Mr. Sobiech stated, he wondered, by doing so and assessing th�s to the property if it may 6e a problem with the pending case regarding 40 feot lots. Mr. Quresh�, City Manager, felt the assessment could be collected at the time the lots were built on, and have the record show they weren't assessed at this t�me, but would be �f a structure was built. RESOLUTIDN NO 70-1979 CON PRO�ECTS ST. 1978-1, ST 1 MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to adopt Resolution No. 70-1979, deleting the charges referred to by the Public 41or,ks D�rector for extensions �nto the 40 fnnt lots. Seconded by Councilman Schnetder. Upon a vo�ce vote, all vot�ng aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTIDN by Councilman Fitzpatrick to adopt Resolution No. 71-1979. Seconded by Councilwoman Moses. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. POLICY STATEMENT CONCERNING THE MAINTENANCE OF LESS THAN FULL BLOCK ALLEYS i�OTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick that the Council adopt a policy statement to the effect that theCb�� cannot be responsible for snow removal on the partial alley under ST. 1979-1, Addendum �3. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. CLAIMS: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to authorize payments of Claims No. 130A03 throught 132P03. Seconded by Councilwoman Moses. Upon a voice vote, all votinn aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried una m mously. RE�UEST BY ISLANDS OF PEACE FOR SUPPORT OF ANOKA COUNTY REGIONAL PLAN Councilman Barnette stated he has been approached by Mr. Ed Wilmes of the Islands of Peace regarding support of the Anoka Coun�y Regional Plan. It was generally felt by the Council that perhaps they should have more �nput and addit�onal lnformaLion from the County before taking any actton. AD�OURNMENT MOTION 6y Councilman Schneider to ad�ourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilrnan Barnette. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously and the Public Hear�ng Meeting of the Fridley City Counc�l of May 14, 1979 ad�ourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ,° ,�,�,,,���.� � ���-+�� Carole Haddad Secy to the City Counc�l Approved 6/4/79 Vl/ L��^'�u'�-� William J. Mayor ��� Nee , � 1 ,