The URL can be used to link to this page

06/23/1997 - 4788��:� ■,. ,4 ,, OFFICIAIr CITY COUNCIL AGENDA COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 23, 1997 �•.t: , � �� cinor FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ATTENDENCE SHEET Manday, Juv�e 23, 1997 7:30 P.M. PLEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PRINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS ITEM NUMBER '�q �� i t � � � , :g A � rs� . r c�t.r �'� � �- �� ,�€ � � s�l � 5 - � - �, o ::; . 2�;� J �'� l'2-C�1� �� ,.� — , 7�' `il I,t. �� - S' ;� � -r �'v/- �c ' � t . �l , �� L� �5�,� � � �Z�r u vk ��-,�� /.� �U-� f� ��, �� ._ ,1 � . , �L., S � 7� �f ��j� ��. �� - � � FI�IDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF ` «,� � JUNE 23,1997 FR�LEY The City of Fridley will not discriminate against or harass anyone in the admission or access to, or treatment, or employment in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuais with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) ' PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of June 9, 1997 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: OLD BUSINESS: Second Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by Making a Change in Zoning Districts (Rezoning Request, ZOA, #97-01) , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 1.01 - 1.04 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 23, 1997 PAGE 2 NEW BUSINESS: Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 4, 1997 ....................................2.01- 2.20 Variance qequest, VAR #97-07, by Onan Corporation, to Increase the Size of a Sign from 80 Square Feet to 161 Square Feet to Allow a Change of Letters on Three Existing Signs, Generally Located at 1400 - 73rd Avenue N.E. (Ward 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.01 - 3.13 Resolution of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, Declaring a Breach of a Development Agreement Between the City of Fridley and Two Other Parties by Reason of the Nonperformance by Those Parties of their Obligations Thereunder, and Reserving for the City of Fridley those Remedies as may be Available to it by Law (Property Located at 61 st Avenue and East River Road) (Ward 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.01 - 4.03 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 23, 1997 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED� Approve Agreement Between the City of Fridley and the County of Anoka for the Residential Recycling Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.01 - 5.06 Appoint Brad Sielaff to Serve on the Springbrook Clean Water Partnership Advisory Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.01 - 6.02 Establish a Public Hearing for July 14 1997, for a Beer License for Oriental House (Ward 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.01 Resolution Authorizing and Directing the Splitting/Combination of Special Assessments on: Lots 1& 2, Block 1, Osborne Commerce Center (Ward 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.01 - 8.04 � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 23, 1997 0 NEW BUSINESS tCONTINUEDI PAGE 4 Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $3,910,000 Floating Rate Demand Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (River Road Investors Project) Series 1997; Approving and Authorizing the Execution of a Trust Indenture, a Loan Agreement, and a Bond Purchase Agreement and Various Other pocuments Related to this Financing (Ward 3) . . . . _ . _ . . ............... . . 9.01 -9.04 Approve Proposai from Electronic Interiors, Inc., for Updating System Documentation for Councii Chambers Technology ..,,._.. ......................... 10.01-10.02 Claims Licenses Estimates: ....................................11.01 �-�--..... .................12.01-12.03 .................. ....... 13.01-13.15 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 23, 1997 PAGE 5 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: OPEN FORUM, VISITORS- (Consideration of Items not on Agenda - 15 Minutes) PUBLIC HEARING: Intoxicating Liquor License for Successful Concept Development, Inc. (Main Event, 7820 University Avenue N. E. ) (Ward 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.01 - 14.02 OLD BUSINESS: Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Section 11.01 of the City Charter (Public Utilities) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.01 - 15.02 Approve Letter of Satisfaction between the City of Fridley and Paragon Cable Related to the Cable Television Transfer of Ownership (Tabled May 19, 1997) . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.01 - 16.02 . � �, FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 23, 1997 NEW BUSINESS: Special Use Permit Request, SP #97-04, by Jim Randers, to Allow Construction of a 3,000 Square Foot Addition, Which Would Bring the Total Lot Coverage of the Property to Approximately 50 Percent, Generally Located at 7839 Elm Street N. E. (Ward 3) ................................... Variance Request, VAR #97-05, by Jim Randers, to Reduce the Minimum Lot Area from 1'/2 Acres to 27,000 Square Feet; to Reduce the Side Yard Setback from 20 Feet to 10 Feet; to Reduce the Setback from an Alley Right-of-Way from 40 Feet to 39 Feet; to Reduce the Required Number of Parking Stalls from 31 to 15; to Reduce the Parking Setback from the Side Lot Line from 5 Feet to 0 Feet; to Reduce the Parking Setback from an Alley Right-of-Way from 15 Feet to 0 Feet; all to Allow the Construction of a 3,000 Square Foot Addition, Generally Located at 7839 Elm Street N.E. (Ward 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 6 � 17.01 - 17.13 18.01 - 18.17 ( Informal Status Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.01 ADJOURN: A FR/DLFY C/TY CllUNC1L MFFTI/VG aF JUN� 23, f997 � �t-.U.-Z`—�- � �� CfiY OF FRIDLEY The City of Fridiey will not discriminate against or harrss anyone in cl1e admission or access [o, or treatment, or employment in its services, pi•ograms, or activities because of race, �ol�r, creed, reli�ion, natior,al origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to pu�lic assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, pro�rar�is, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. ('i'TD/572-3534) PLEDGE OF ALLEGlANCE. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of June 9, 1997 L�`j�.:�� a � �� , o��C_ APPROVAL UF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: OLD BUSINESS: Second Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the City Code of the City of F� idley, Minnesota, by n#� O� Making a Change in Zonina QR,.1� 9, Jisiricts (Rezoning Request, ZOA, #97-Q1. ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.01 - 1.04 %--z� �t,, Z��:s� �" ��,L �� ' ,,�--'' C� �-� . �- NEW BU.SINESS: Rec•eive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 4, 199 i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.01 - 2.20 �fi ,� '.� �� " ,/J�-,^'',� ��x�,�, �� c, �� Variance Request, VAR #97-07, by Onan Corporation, to Increase the Size of a Sign from 80 Square Feet to 161 Square Feet to Allow a Change of Letters on Three Existing Signs, Generally Located at 1400 - 73rd Avenue N.E. (Ward 2) . . 3.01 - ;.13 G�,�,�� —� , APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSEiVT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED� 2esolution of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, Declaring a Breach of a Development Agreement Between the City of Fridley and Two Other Parties by Reason of the Nonperformance by Those Parties of their Obligations Thereunder, and Reserving for the City of Fridley those Remedies as may be Available to it by Law (Property Located at 61 st Avenue and East River Road) (Ward 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.01 - 4.03 ,� Gr i�C'" . e..�-.-� �,,,� � �,,_.�-� ,��- /F' Approve Agreement Between the City of Fridley and the County of Anoka for the Residential Recycling Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.01 - 5.06 1��.....-�`-�� Appoint Brad Sielaff to Serve on the Springbrook Clean Water Partnership Advisory Committee . . . . . . . . . . 6.01 - 6.02 ��y�..,,:,.� �----� � , v Establish a Public Hearing for July 14 1997, for a Beer License for Oriental House (Ward 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.01 , i�'`'ZL %�,-�� G� , �--�- �/� �/�� Resolution Authorizing and Uirecting the Splitting/Combination of Special ��D Assessments on: Lots 1& 2, ��,3 Eilock 1, Osborne Commerce Center (Ward 3) � �. ��.�X�� Q, 04 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS �CONTINUEDa: Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of $3,910,000 Floating Rate Demand Commerciai Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (River Road Investors Project) Series 1997; Approving and Authorizing the Execution of a Trust �� Indenture, a Loan Agreement, and a Bond Purchase Agreement and Various Other pocuments Related to this Financing (Ward 3) . . . . . . . . . . . 9.01 - 9.04 ��.-� ,�� Approve Proposal from Electronic Interiors, Inc., for Updating System Documentation for Council Chambers Technology 10.01 - 10.02 U"�L�t �c.—o.r-�`�1 �/ Claims Licenses Estimates ��j'c.f-.•1.�:-�—.-:- 11.01 ��%l�-r�-i'.`�12.01 - 12.03 c�,j� ..`........... 13.01-13.15 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: � �,L Z,�.� ,�„�.�=L,� �� OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: �� c_ .-..--� �� s � OLD BUSINESS: Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Section 11.01 of the City Cnarter (Public iJtilities) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.01 - 15.02 �i� �`-�� Approve Letter of Satisfaction between the City of Fridley and Paragon Cable Related to the Cable Television Transfer of Ownership (Tabled May 19, 1997) ...: 1G.01 - i,�.02 � `�-�,..- ��-' �. �--tr��-�- ' - ' ��--- -z - ,�. NEW BUSINESS: Special Use Permit Request, SP #97-04, by Jim Randers, to Allow Construction of a 3,000 Square Foot Addition, Which Would Bring the Total Lot Coverage of the Property to Approximately 50 Percent, Generally Located at 7839 Elm Street N.E. (Ward 31 �� 17(11-171� /��'2�� " � . ��.�.� . w '� ,,�-�, . r �. �� _ Variance Request, VAR #97-05, by Jim Randers, to Reduce the Minimum Lot Area from 1% Ac�es to 27,000 Square Feet; to Reduce the Side Yard Setback from 20 Feet to 10 Feet; to Reduce the Ci.�..iiu�.�� fi vri i� C�i r r':�i%,ji r:��li`u{ �fv�iy° �i:"in':. 40 Feet to 39 Feet; to Reduce the P.equired Number of Parking Stalls frorn 31 to 15; tc Reduce the Parking Setaack from the Side Lot Line from 5 Feet to 0 Feet; to Reduce �� the Parking Setback from an Alley c-Right-of-Way from 15 Feet to 0 Feet: all to ��.,� jA.11ow the Construction ofa 3,OG0 Squar� �� Foot Addition, Generally Located at 7839 Elm Street N.E. (Ward 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.01 - ��.17 (Consideration of Items not on Agenda - 15 Minutes) G'� PUBLIC NEARING: Intoxicating Liquor License fc�r �uccessfui Cor�cept Development, Iric. (Main Fvent, 7820 Universiry �,venue N.E )(Ward 3) 14 01 - 14 � 2 C� - � ; S— -L c° �� °-�l,�,��---`�__� ;r`�rmal Status Reports /''�'?"�... 19 01 /�� ,_UJQURN: !-?,�,�� , �,� �� r, k ` g THE MINUTES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JLJNE 9, 1997 - ,� , - �t . i THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETTNG OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF JLJNE 9 , 1997 The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was �called to order by Mayor Jorgenson at 7:34 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Jorgenson led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jorgenson, Councilman Barnette, Councilman Billings, Councilman Schneider and Councilwoman Bolkcom � MEMBERS ABSENT: None PRESENTATIONS: CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION FOR FLOOD RELIEF HELP: Ms. Rosie Griep, Fridle.y Police Department, presented a plaque to Colonel_ Slice of the Civil Air Patrol in recognition for their assistance with the flood relief. The Civil Air Patrol coordinated and supported the City's. efforts and maintained a sens,e of order. Colonel Slice. thanked the City Council on behalf of the Civil Air Patrol. She asked that the City Council not hesitate to call on them when they can be of assistance. . Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that the Civil Air Patrol was very helpful. Their efforts were appreciated. Ms. Griep stated that the City wished to recognize four,Fridley police officers who responded to the severe flooding in East Grand Forks and volunteered to assist in this area. These officers were Wayne Pfuhl, Skip Standal, Greg Salo, and Dave Sorensen, who were not able to attend the meeting this evening. AWARD FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION: Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, presented the project of the year award to the Gity from the Minnesota Chapter of the American Public Works Association for the Stonybrook Creek project. JOHN CONNELLY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NORTH METRO CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU: Mayor Jorgenson introduced Mr. John Connelly, the new Executive Director for the North Metro Convention and Visitors Bureau. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 2 Mr. Connelly thanked the City Council for inviting him to the meeting. He appreciated the opportunity to meet everyone. He has been in this new position for about a week. He came from Rochester where he was Executive Director for four years. He is excited about the opportunity to market the north metro communities and promote tourism. He said he looked forward to working with the staff and City Council. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: COUNCIL MEETING, MAY 19, 1997: MOTION by Councilman Barnette to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: OLD BUSINESS: 1. ORDINANCE NO. 1097 I�MENDING THE ZONING CODE, CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED "ZONING," BY AMENDING SECTIONS 205.17.05.D.(6), 205.18.05.D.(6), 205.19.05.D.(6), ADDING SECTION.205.20 (M-4 MANUFACTURING ONLY), AND RENUMBERING CONSECUTIVE SECTIONS: AND AUTHORIZSNG PUBLICATION OF OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the first reading of this ordinance was held Apri�l 28. The M-4 zoning district creates stricter standards for industrial lots located near residential areas. These restrictions relate mainly to uses and exclude trucking terminals and other uses that require outdoor storage of materials, vehicles and equipment. The remaining requirements are similar to those used for other industrial districts. S.taff recommends approval of this ordinance and authorization to publish the ordinance by title and summary only. WAIVED THE READING AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1097 ON THE SECOND READING. FURTHER, AUTHORIZED PUBLICATION OF THE OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUN�lARY ONLY FOR ORDINANCE NO. 1097. 2. RECEIUE THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF - MAY 21, 1997: RECEIVED THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING CONIl�4ISSION MEETING OF MAY 21, 1997. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 3 3. SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #97-03, BY THOMAS AND LYNN I,ASSER, TO ALLOW A SECOND AGCESSORY: STRUCTURE (WORKSHOP) OVER 240 SQUARE FEET, GENERALLY IACATED AT 5840 TENNI50N DRIVE N.E. ( WARD 2 ) : � S. Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the petitioners are requesting a special use permit to construct a 16 foot by 18 foot structure in their rear yard. This structure is to be used as a workshop and for storaqe of lawn equipment and tools. The new structure will be covered with siding similar to that on the front of the dwelling. The Planning Commission and staff both recommend approval with the stipulations that the structure shall be architecturally compatible with the existinq structure and shall, at no time, be utilized for a home occupation. GRANTED SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #97-03, WITH THE STTPULATIONS THAT THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SHALL BE ARCHITECTURALLY COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND THAT THE STRUCTURE SHALL, AT NO TIME, . BE UTILIZED FOR A HOME OCCUPATION. APPROVE CI�NGE ORDER NO. 1 TO CENTRAI� AVENUE BITUMINOUS SIDEWALK PROJECT N0. ST. 1994-9: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this change order is for $31,673.80 to Hardrives, Inc. The change order will provide for two bikeway segments on the east side of East River Road between Rice Creek Way and.Locke Lake Road and between Glen Creek Road and Osborne Road. These segments were to have been constructed with the County's last East River Road project, but were dropped due to the inability to negotiate reasonable costs with the County's paving cantractor. Hardrives, Ir�c. has agreed to build these segments, along with the Central Avenue bikeway, at the same unit cost as the Central Avenue bikeway. These costs are acceptable to the state and are totally reimbursable through state aid funds. AUTHORIZED CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 TO THE CENTRAI� AVENUE BITUMOINOU5 SIDEWALK PROJECT NO. ST. 1994-9 WITH HP.RDRIVES, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $31,673.80, APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 TO 1996 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. ST. 1996-1 & 2: Mr. Burns, City manager, stated that this change order is in the amount of $10,991.50 to Thomas & Sons Construction for additional asphalt used on Alden Way and 77th Way. The change order also covers additional railroad crossing pavement markings on the-east side of the Burlington Northern tracks on 77th Way. AUTHORIZED CHANGE ORDER NO. 4 TO THE 1996 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1996-1 & 2 WITH THOMAS.& SONS CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,991.50. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 4 6. RESOLUTION NO. FROM JUL 44-1997 AU�HORIZING. FURNISHING CHEMICAL ASSES. 997 TO JUNE 30, 1999): fT WITH STATE OF Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the Fridley Fire Department has been the contracting agency for the North Metro Chemical Assessment Team. This team includes the cities of Fridley, Coon Rapids, and the Blaine/Spring Lake Park/Mounds View fire district. The new contract extends the terms of the existing contract that has been in effect since August, 1996. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 44-1997. 7. RESOLUTION N0. 45-1997 AUTHORIZING LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE FIRE TRAINING ASSOCIATION, A JOINT POWERS CREATED ORGANIZP;TION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATSON OF THE FIRE 'TRA.INING CENTER: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that as the property owner of the fire training site, the City is being asked to extend its lease agreement with the Fire Training Association that uses the site. This Association includes Fridley, Blaine, Spring Lake Park, Mounds View and Brooklyn Center. Staff recommends the approval of.this 25-year lease agreement. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 45-1997. 8. RESOLUTION NO. 46-1�97 CALLING FOR P;. PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL FOR A HOUSING FINANCE PROGRAM AND THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE AN ELDERL.Y HOUSING DEVEI;OPMENT NOAH'S ARK OF FRIDLEY PROJECT) PURSUANT TO MINNESOT UTHORIZING THE PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF THE HEARI Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the proposed public hearing date is July 14, 1997 for the Noah's Ark project. This development is along the west University Avenue service drive near Wal-Mart. The bonds for this project are being issued under Minnesota statutes authorizing cities to issue revenue bonds for multi-family housing developments. In agreeinq to issue bonds, the City.is not pledging its full faith and credit, nor is it providing any funding for the project, but simply acting as a conduit for a tax exempt bond issue. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 46-1997, AND SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR JULY 14, 1997. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL I�ETING QF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 5 9. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR DEVELOPMENT, INC . (MAIN EVENT ) (WARD 3 ) : 23, 1997, FOR AN UCCESSFUL CONCEPT Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that the proposed hearing date of June 23 for this intoxicating liquor license. The license would be issued to the new owners of the Main Event at 7820 University Avenue. SET THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AN INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR SUCCESSFUL CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT, INC. FOR JUNE 23, 1997. 10. RESOLUTION N0. 97-1997 AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF ICE FACILITY RENOVATION GRANT APPLICATION (COLLIMBIA ARENA) (WARD 1): Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this application is for a $50,000 grant that would be matched with another $50,000 from. the National Sports Center Foundation. The funds would be used for repair and renovation of the roof and locker rooms at Columbia Arena. The City is proposing the grant application at the request of the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission, as they are not eligible to apply for the grant. The County, City and school district in which the facility is located is eiigible to make application for the grant; however, Anoka County has a competing grant appiication and does not wish to. be the �ponsor. Mr. Burns stated that there is absolutely no City funding required and no responsibility for administering the grant. In view of the value of these improvements to Fridley users of the Columbia Arena, staff is recommending Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 47-1997. 11. CLAIMS: AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 74587 THROUGH 74911. 12. LICENSES: APPROVED THE LICENSE AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE IN THE LICENSE CLERK'S OFFICE. 13. ESTIMATES: APPROVED THE ESTIMATES, AS FOLLAWS: Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. 13925 Northdale Blvd. Rogers, MN 55374 1996 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1996 - 1& 2 Estimate No. 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $78, 684.27 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 6 Richmar Construction, Inc. 7776 Alden Way, N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 _ Water Treatment Plant No. 3 Project No. 293 Estimate No. 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $47,797.87 S.N. Hentges & Sons, Inc. 650 Quaker Avenue Jordan, MN 55352 Removal & Replacement of Miscellaneous Concrete Curb, Gutter & Sidewalk Project No. 305 Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 9, 638.70 Insituform Central, Inc. 17988 Edison Avenue Chesterfield, MO 63005 Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair Project No. 304 Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $69, 110.60 Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. Holstad and Larson, P.L.C. 3535 Vadnais Center Drive St. Paul, MN 55110 Services Rendered as City Attorney for the Month of May, 1997 . . . . . . . . . $ 4,250.00 No persons in the audience spoke regarding the proposed consent agenda items. Councilman Barnette asked about the proposed Noah's Ark project. Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that it was a 104 unit elderly high rise development to be constructed next to Wal-Mart along the University Avenue service drive. Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that there would be a variety of units in the market ranqe available to seniors and affordable to those with low and moderate incomes. She believed the qualifying age is 55 or older, but she would verify this with the developer. Councilman Barnette asked how persons may obtain further information. Ms. Dacy stated that they could call her office at 572-3590 to obtain the name of the developer. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL t�ETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 7 Mr. Burns stated that representatives from Noah's Ark will be present at the public hearing on July 14 to answer further questions. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to approve the consent agenda items. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimousl�. ADOPTION OF AGENDA: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to Seconded by Councilman Barnette. aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: adopt the agenda as submitted. Upon a voice vote, all voting motion carried unanimously. FRIDLEY `49ER DAYS CELEBRATION: Ms. Jan Golden, President of the Fridley 49er Association, stated that in keeping with the City values and non-violence they are promoting the Fridley parks and recreation system for the `49er Days celebration. Over 35 events have been planned between June 11 and 15. She wants everyone to know that Fridley is a fun place to live, work, and play. She is thankful to the businesses who support this event. Tickets and buttons are available at Snyders, Super-America, Sign Language and the Recreation office. The parade will be Thursday evening, June 12, beginning at 6:30 p.m. from the high school. The Grand Marshal for the parade will be former mayor, William Nee. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 14. PUBLIC HEARING ON REVOCATION/SUSPENSION OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE FOR SHARX CLUB, 3720 EAST RIVER ROAD (WARD 3): (CONTINUED FROM MAY 19, 1997): Mayor Jorgenson re-opened this public hearing at 7:54 p.m. which had been continued from the May 19, 1997 meeting. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, stated that since the May 19 meeting there have been intensive discussions with Mr. DeFoe's attorney which have resulted in an .agreement that he believes fully addresses the concerns of City personnel and the City Council. The agreement has resulted in a proposed resolution that is intended to address those points. It is recommended that the public hearing be closed and the resolution adopted. Sharx's has agreed to all the points in the resolution. He requested that this agreement be acknowledged by Mr. DeFoe's attorney, Mr. Martinson. Mr. Knaak stated that the resolution provides for some immediate corrective measures and a penalty which includes a one-week suspension. Mr. Brad Martinson, attorney representing Mr. DeFoe, stated that they are in agreement with the terms in the proposed resolution. On behalf of Mr. DeFoe, he would like to thank the City Council and staff for the time they worked on this issue. He acknowledged FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 8 Mr. Knaak's efforts and thanked him for the courteous and professional way they have been treated. Mr. Martinson stated that the City Council has a number of items that staff presented, and statistics were part of the story, as well as some people concerns.. It is his and Mr. DeFoe's hope that the people who are involved in Sharx will become known to the City Council, as they are concerned about the image in the community and the issues that led to this public hearing. In no way do they take lightly the Police Department concerns and the concerns of the City Council. He hoped this resolution will be a stepping stone for a dialogue that wiil persuade the City Council that this is a responsibly run business. Their goal for the next year is to be on the consent agenda which they hope to accomplish. Councilman Billings asked if this procedure was similar to a quasi- judicial situation where the City Council sits as a judge. The agreement that was reached is similar to a"plea barqain" where the . attorneys have worked out the issues before it gets to the judge. He also questioned if the procedure that the City Attorney and the licensee's attorney reached is common with other municipalities in the State of Minnesota in these types of situations. Mr. Knaak stated that he would have to answer in the affirmative on all these questions. � MOTION by Councilman Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Billings. Upon a voice vote, all votinq aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:00 p.m. RESOLUTION NO. 48-1997 PROVIDING FOR THE LIMITED SUSPENSION, APPROVAL OF CONTINUATION WITH EXPRESS CONDITIONS AND SUBSEQUENT PROCESS OF ONGOING REVIEW OF THE LIQUOR LICENSE OF SHARX IN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY• MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 48-1997 pursuant to the recommendation of the City Attorney and staff. This resolution approving the liquor license for Sharx in the City of Fridley is subject to certain penalties stated in the resolution, as well as certain ongoing, stated conditions that are made part of the license. This motion is made on the express understanding that the issues and reservations expressed and stated earlier by the City's staff and this City Council related to the Sharx liquor license have now, in fact, been and will be addressed as the result of passage of this resolution, and that the penalty imposed is reasonable and appropriate under the circumstanees. Further, by this motion, staff is directed to closely monitor compliance by Sharx with all of the conditions now imposed by this resolution on the license. Seconded by Councilman Billinqs. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 9 15. PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENT TO SECTION 7.02 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER REGARDING POWER OF TAXATION: MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 5:00 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that Ordinance No. 592 adopted in August, 1975 included restricting language to Section 7.02 of the City Charter in that it provided for a 16 mill limit on the amount of taxes levied. The City Council was required to hold a public hearing for any levy in excess of.l6 mills. Mr. Pribyl stated that in 1988, the state simplified the tax system, and there were new formulas for determining the actual tax. This, however, resulted in changes in the language from mills to terms such as tax capacity. Staff and the Charter Commission are recommending that all references to the 1975 modification be removed. The replacement language is tied with a Consumer Price Index specific to the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. Mr. Pribyl stated that the Charter Commission agreed to expedite the amendment process, but he wanted the proposed changes reviewed and approved by their attorney. Their attorney has reviewed the amendment and recommended that approval be withheld until the 1997 Omnibus Tax Bill, recently signed by Governor Carlson, can be considered. He recommended, therefore, that this hearing be continued to July 14, 1997. Councilman Billings stated that Council has been conducting public hearings on the mill levy even though there were changes by the state, because it was not known if the 16 mills would be exceeded. Basically, what this amendment would accomplish is to bring the City Charter in compliance with�state statutes. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to coritinue this public hearing to July 14, 1997. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. 16. PUBLIC HEARING ON AN INTOXICATING LIQUOR LIC.ENSE FOR VALLEY CREEK, INC. (FORMERLY MAPLE LANES) (WARD 2): MOTION by Councilman Schneider 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 Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing. opened at 8:14 p.m. Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that this is a request for an intoxicating liquor license by Valley Creek, Inc. for the former Maple Lanes business. The Police Department has completed the required background check and found no reason to deny this request. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 10 The applicant has acquired the Maple Lanes bowling facility at 6310 Highway 65. Councilman Schneider asked if the applicant has run similar facilities. Mr. Mike Anderson, representing the new owner Harvey Anderson, stated that Mr. Anderson has been in the bowling business for 25 years and is not planning any significant changes at Maple Lanes. Some of the bowlinq centers he owns are Southtown, Village North, Valley Creek, Sundance Lanes, Heroes, and Saxton Lanes. Councilman Billings stated that he was under the impression that several of these locations were owned.by a construction company. Mr. Anderson stated that they were owned by Carlson-Anderson Construction at one time. Councilman Billings asked if they were operating Mingles in Little Canada. Mr. Anderson stated that they have closed it, as they are really not in the bar business. Bowling is their number one operation. Councilman Schneider stated that he assumes Mr. Anderson is aware of the liquor license requirements which the City takes very seriously. No other persons spoke regarding this intoxicating liquor license. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vate, all voting aye,. Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:17 p.m. 17. PUBLIC HEARING ON A REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #97-01, BY THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, TO REZONE. EIGHT PROPERTIES FROM M-i, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, AND M-2, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, TO_M-4, MANUFACTURING: MOTION by Councilman Billings 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 Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing opened at 8:17 p.m. Ms. McPherson, Planning Assistant, stated that this public hearing is to consider rezoning of eight pr.operties from either M-�l Light Industrial or M-2 Heavy Industrial to M-4 Manufacturing. Council recently adopted a new ordinance which amends the existing industrial districts by eliminating loading docks on corner lots which face the public right-of-way across from residential districts and creates an M-4, Manufacturing Only district. Ms. McPherson stated that the intent of the newly created M-4 district is to reduce the impact of warehouse and distribution FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 _ PAGE 11 � facilities on residential properties, encourage uses which provide. a significant amount of job opportunities, promote clean uses which do not produce fumes, odors, or require outside operations which may cause noise, and eliminate uses which require significant amounts of outdoor storage and display. Ms. McPherson stated that eight properties have been recommended to the Planning Commission for rezoning. These are:, Everest Properties at 61st Avenue and Main Street; Anderson Truckinq, Osborne Road; Kurt Manufacturing, Central Avenue; Friendly Chevrolet, Central Avenue; McGlynn's, Commerce Lane; Coachman Companies, Osborne Road; R.R.I., Inc., Ashton Avenue; and Northco Property, Northco Drive. After review by the Planning Commission, they recommended five sites be rezoned to M-4. They are the Everest Properties, Anderson Trucking, R.R.I., Inc., Friendly Chevrolet, and Kurt Manufacturing (both the occupied and vacant parcel). The Commission weighed the intent of the ordinance with the possible impact to existing owners and recommended that the McGlynn, Coachman, and Northco sites not be rezoned. Staff recommends that Council concur with the Planning Commission's recommendation. Councilman Schneider asked if any of the property owners objected to the rezoning. . Ms. McPherson stated that the owner of the Everest Properties at 61st Avenue and Main Street has strenuously objected to the property beinq rezoned. The property owners of the other four parcels recommended for rezoning have not objected throughout the rezoning process. Kurt Manufacturing was contacted to make sure they understood the rezoning. They had no objections. Mr. John Pritchard, Chief Operations Officer for McGlynn's, stated _ that he was prepared to share concerns on the rezoning of their site. However, the Planning Commission has re�ommended their site not be rezoned. They hope that Council concurs. Mr. Richard Eskola, attorney representing Coachman Companies, stated that he had the same agenda as Mr. Pritchard. His client is actively marketing the property. He urged Council to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation and not rezone the Coachman property. No other persons spoke regarding the proposed rezoning of these parcels. MOTION by Councilman Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously and the public hearing closed at 8:29 p.m. . � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 12 OLD BUSINESS: 18. ORDINANCE N0. 1098 OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, FINDING AND DECLARING UNPAVED, GRAVEL, OR DIRT DRIVEWAYS TO BE A PUBLIC NUISANCE, DESCRIBING THE PENALTIES THEREFORE, AND AMENDING SECTIONS 110.02 AND CREATING NEW SECTIONS 110.06 AND 110.07: Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this is the second reading of an ordinance which would declare unpaved, gravel, or dirt driveways a public nuisance. At the time of the first reading of the ordinance on July 8, staff was authorized to hire the Center for Energy and the Environment (CEE) to work with the households who are directly affected by this ordinance to determine the financial impact. Ms. Dacy stated that as a result of this process every household affected was notified. Of the 234 households, 31 did pave their driveway, 111 either did not respond to telephone messages or had unpublished telephone numbers. However, 92 households were contacted, and 47 of those proceeded to request audits. Of the 47 who expressed an interest in an audit, 33 have expressed interest in participating in the City's volume based paving program. The remaining 45 households of the 92 contacted either were not interested .or offered miscellaneous comments which ranged from refusal to comply with the ordinance to not being prepared to make a decision. Ms. Dacy stated that the CEE staff advised that of these 33. households, eighty percent have incomes which can assimilate the cost of the improvement and the remaining twenty percent have lower incomes which may need a deferral, a Federal grant, or the HRA's "last resort" program. Since the initiation of the five percent. housing improvement loan program, 19 properties have used the program to pave a driveway. The average household income was approximately $41,550; the median income was $29,957; the lowest was $23,864; and the highest was �50,000 plus. Ms. Dacy stated that if the ordinance is adopted staff is proposing a five-year period with no prosecution. She systematic code enforcement program has been initiated so that staff will remind the owners they have up to five years to pave their driveways. Another letter will be sent to the remaining 111 households that were not contacted. Ms. Dacy stated that under Section 110.02.1, Driveway Nuisance, the following words in the first paragraph "as provided under Chapter 205.07(6)A(2)" should be eliminated. This applies simply to the R-1 zoned properties. There is one unpaved driveway located in a C-2 zone. Councilman Barnette asked how they arrived at a.figure of $1.25 a square foot. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997. PAGE 13 Ms. Dacy stated that last summer several driveway contractors were contacted, and a quote was received of $1.25 a square foot. Councilman Barnette stated that the bids he received for his driveway were considerably higher. Councilman Schneider asked if the $1.25 a square foot is still a realistic figure. Ms. Dacy stated that all the information she received was about that amount. Councilwoman Jorgenson stated that if the quote was for a minimum of thirty driveways, this may be the reason for a reduction in the cost. There was discussion on how a new property owner would know about this requirement. Councilman Schneider felt that anyone purchasing property would probably have an assessment search. Councilman Billings suggested that possibly this requirement could be incorporated on the form used for an assessment search so prospective new owners would be aware that the driveway wouTd need to be paved. MOTION by Councilwoman Bolkcom to waive the reading and adopt Ordinance rTo. 1098 on the second reading and order publication, with the following change: Delete the following words "as provided under Chapter 205.07(6)A(2)", under Section 110.02.1, Driveway Nuisance. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Mr. Ralph Wedgewood, 5871 W. Moore Lake Drive, felt that the City should not wait five years to have the driveways paved. He felt this should be enforced immediately. For those persons who have a financial hardship, they should receive a waiver. Councilman Schneider stated that this has been a lengthy process. Hearings were held, and the five years was a compromise. There are some provisions for funding or deferment of the assessment. Mr. Wedgewood stated that people do not pave their driveways because they are derelicts. He hated to think that if someone is a big enough derelict that the City would give them money to accomplish what most citizens do on their own. The City then becomes a caretaker for the derelicts in the community. Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that there are those on fixed incomes that this ordinance will affect. This is a huge investment.for some people. Mr. Wedgewood stated that he knows of cases where people have plenty of resources, but they do not keep up their property. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 14 Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that, hopefully, with the systematic code enforcement:some of those issues can be addressed. - Ms. Dacy stated that the funds are.recovered, with interest, from the funding programs available. This really provides additional time to pay and a means to finance the improvement to fit into a household's budget. Mayor Jorgenson stated that there are instruments in place. If a property owner does not keep up his property, the City can intervene and assess the costs to the owner. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS• 19. RESOLUTION NO. 49-1997 AUTHORIZING THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY PAVING: Mr. Flora, Public Works Director, stated that this resolution gives staff the authorization to initiate the advertisement for bids to pave residential driveways. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to adopt Resolution No. 49-1997. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. 20. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS (REZONE EIGHT PROPERTIES FROM M-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, AND Ni-2, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, TO M-4 MANUFACTURING): Ms. McPherson, Planning Assistant, stated that the public hearing earlier this evening had covered eight properties to be rezoned from M-1 and M-2 to M-4. The Planning Commission has recommended that five of these eight properties be rezoned to M-4. If Council concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation, sites #2, 4, and 8 should be deleted from this proposed ordinance. These sites are the McGlynn, Coachman, and Northco properties. The five sites to be rezoned are the Everest Properties, Main Street; Anderson Trucking, Osborne Road; R.R.I., Inc., Ashton Avenue; Friendly Chevrolet, Central Avenue; and Kurt Manufacturing, Central Avenue. The legal description for the existing Kurt Manufacturing facility. also would need to be added to this ordinance for the second and final reading. MOTION by Councilman Billings to waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. MOTION by Councilman Billings to amend the ordinance by eliminating the following: Site No. 2, Lot 3, Block l, Northco Business Park 2nd Addition; Site No. 4, all references to any part of Lot 3, Block 4, Commerce Park; and Site No. 8, all references to Lot 2, Block 4, Commerce Park. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL I�ETING.OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 15 voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorqenson declared the motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Councilman Billings to amend the ordinance by adding the legal description for part of the Kurt Manufacturing site and direct staff to bring it back for the second reading of the ordinance. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a voice vote, all voting �aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. UPON A VOICE VOTE TAKEN ON THE ABOVE MOTION, all voted aye, and Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. 21. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11.01 OF THE CITY CHARTER (REGARDING PUBLIC UTILITIES): Ms. Dacy, Community Development Director, stated that this amendment was suggested as part of the analysis regarding the impact of telecommunication facilities in the City. The amendment includes reference to other communication services or any other products or services the City, by ordinance, determines to be in the interests of the public. This amendment provides Council with the flexibility to pursue public ownership of the telecommunication facilities if it is in the interests of the public. Ms. Dacy stated that at the public hearing held on this proposed amendment there was testimony by one of the providers. The Charter Commission recommends approval of this amendment. Their attorney concurs, as suggested by our City Attorney. MOTION by Councilman Schneider to waive the reading and approve the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilman Barnette. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously. 22. INFORM�L STATUS REPORTS: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that in the conference session he would like to discuss the causeway lighting project on Highway 65 and the Maynard Nielsen property on East River Road. Ms. Dacy stated that staff brought forth a proposal for decorative lighting on Highway 65. The lightinq would be an image and traffic safety enhancement for the City. This issue was discussed informally after the May 5 Council meeting. There was a rec�uest for accident history; however, MnDOT has not complied, as yet, with this request. There was also mention of a neighborhood meeting and a survey, as well as a list of other information and requests. She has been compiling information regarding the requests. Councilman Schneider stated that he is not necessarily opposed to this lighting, but he would like the neighborhood involved. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 16 Ms. Dacy stated that the option to Council and the HRA is to determine if they want to include this lightinq in the bid specifications. Councilman Schneider stated that he wanted some public input before he made a decision. Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that Ann Pribula, 6880 East River Road, is anxious to return to her home on East River Road. Ms. Pribula has been relocated because of the construction on East River Road. Despite promises from the contractor that she could return to her home by last Christmas, she still is not able to move back. She questioned if anyone from the City could assist Ms. Pribula in resolving this issue. Mayor Jorgenson stated that she has contacted the City's building official, Ron Julkowski, and understands that the contractor was going to try to finish this project in short order. Councilwoman Bolkcom stated that an outstanding issue is the bond for the landscaping. Ms. Pribula stated that she just wants to be able to move back into her home. Any assistance would be appreciated. Councilman Billings stated that he wanted to make sure the conflict is not with City staff. He questioned if the contractor was licensed to do business in Fridley. He thought perhaps there is some way, through the licensing process, that the City can.make sure he fulfills his promises to the residents. Mayor Jorgenson asked if the City required a bond, if a completion date could be stated and, if the landscaping is not completed, it the City would cash the bond. Ms. Dacy stated that she believed this could be done. She said that she would follow through on this issue with the building inspector and contact the contractor to see if they can resolve this problem. Councilman Billings stated that he has submitt�d a memorandum regarding the Northstar Corridor. The counties and .cities along Highway 10 have initiated a study on traffic in that corridor and have applied for federal funding. One possibility is commuter rail between .Minneapolis and St. Cloud. Amtrak is conducting some demonstration projects around the nation. $100,000 has been raised to bring that Amtrak demonstration to the Twin Cities the week of July 1, 2, and 3. He would keep Council informed as plans develop in that corridor study. Mayor Jorgenson reminded the residents that this is `49er Days week. The celebration begins Wednesday, June ll and runs through Sunday, June 15. The parade will be on Thursday evening. There will be a carnival next to the Municipal Center. She invited everyone to participate in this week's activities. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 9, 1997 PAGE 17 ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Councilman Barnette to adjourn the me�eting. Seconded by Councilwoman Bolkcom. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Jorgenson declared the motion carried unanimously and the Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council of June 9, 1997 adjourned at 9:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Carole Haddad Nancy J. Jorgenson Secretary to the City Council Mayor 1VIEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: June 19, 1997 TO: William Burns, City.Manager�� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant SUBJECT: Second Reading of an Ordinance Approving a Rezoning Request, ZOA #97-01, by the City of Fridley The City Council approved first reading of the attached ordinance at its June 9, 1997 meeting. The ordinance has been amended to delete the Northco, McGlynn's, and Coachman properties, and to add the existing Kurt Manufacturing site. RECOMMENDATIQN Staff recommends that the City Council conduct second reading of the �ttached ordinance. MM/dw M-97-284 1.01 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS The City Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows: SECTION l. Appendix D of the City Code of Fridley is amended as hereinafter indicated. Be and is hereby rezoned. SECTION 2. The tracts or areas.within the County of Anoka and the City of Fridley and described as: Lot 2, Block l, Anderson Development Replat Lot 8, Auditor's Subdivision No. 78 Lot 6, Auditor's Subdivision No. 78, except the South 200 feet of the East 376 feet of said lot, except that taken for road purposes, subject to easements of record. The unplatted City of Fridley; the West 5 acres of the North 310 feet of the South 370 feet of the ,North .1120 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section l2, Township 30, Range 24, and that part of the North 310 feet of the South 370 feet of the North 1120 feet of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 12, lying easterly of State Trunk Highway 65 as the same is now laid out and constructed. The Southerly 370 feet of the Northerly 1,120 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 12, except the West 5 acres of the North 310 feet, except that taken for road purposes, subject to easements of record. The unplatted City of Fridley described as follows: That part of the Northeast Quarter of 1.02 Page 2 - Ordinance No. the Northwest Quarter lying Easterly of the Westerly 600 feet and lying Southerly of the Northerly 1,120 feet of Section 12, Township 30, Range 24. That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 3, Township 30, Range 24, lying Westerly of the Westerly right of way line of the Burlington Northern Railroad, lying Easterly of Ashton Avenue northeast, lying Northerly of Arnal Addition, and lying Southerly of the following described lirie: Beginning at a point on the Easterly right of way line of Ashton Avenue Northeast 415 feet Southerly with its intersection with the Southerly right of way line of Ironton Street, then Easterly parallel with said southerly right of way line to the intersection with said railroad right of way and said line there terminate, except for that taken for road purposes, subject to easements of record. Lot 7, Auditor's Subdivision No.78, all that part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 22, Township 30, Range 24, lying Easterly of the Northern Pacific Railway Company right of way lying South of a line which is parallel with the north line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and 290.4 feet South of said north line as measured along the East line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and lying North of a line which is parallel with the South line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and 739.2 North of said South line as measured along said East line being Lot 7, Auditor's Subdivision No. 78. Is hereby designated to be in the Zoned District M-4, Manufacturing Only. SECTION 3. That the Zoning Administrator is directed to change the official zoning map to show said tracts or areas to be rezoned from Zoned Districts M-1, 1.03 Page 3 - Ordinance No. Light Industrial and M-2, Heavy Industrial to M-4, Manufacturing Only. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1997. NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK Public Hearing: June 9, 1997 First Reading: June 9, 1997 Second Reading: Publication: 1.04 CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING CONIl�lISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the June 4, 1997, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Dave Kondrick, LeRoy Oquist, Dean Saba, Brad Sielaff, Larry Kuechle Diane Savage, Connie Modig Others Present: Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant Jim Randers, Display Arts Paul Stone, Stone Construction Wes &. Jeanine Grandstrand, 5431 Madison St NE Linda Oslund, 5412 Madison Street N.E. Pauline Charchenko, 589 Cheri Lane N.E. Bob Dietrick, 572 Cheri Lane N.E. Steve Britven, 572 - 63rd Avenue N.E. Al Noutsby, 5421 Madison Street N.E. Norma Amundson, New Brighton APPROVAL OF MAY 21, 1997, PLANNING CONINIISSION MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to approve the May 21, 1997, Planning Commission minutes as written. UPON. A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION C�R�2IED UNANIMOUSLY. l: (Tabled from 5/21/97 meetin ) PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL USE PERMTT, SP #97-02, BY HOME DEPOT USA, INC.: To allow nurseries or garden centers which require outdoor sales and storage on Lot l, Block l, Home Depot Fridley Addition, generally located at 5650 Main Street N.E. Ms. McPherson stated this item was tabled at the May 21st meeting. Staff today received communication that Home Depot wishes this item to remain tabled.until the June 18th meeting. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SP #97-04, BY JIM RANDERS: To allow construction of a 3,000 square foot addition, which would bring the total lot coverage of the property to approximately 50o, on Lots 24 - 28, Block l, Onaway District, generally located at 7839 Elm Street N.E. 2.01 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 2 MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:35 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated the request by Mr. Randers of Display Arts, Inc., requires that a special use permit be approved to increase the maximum lot coverage on an industrial lot from 40o to 50o. If approved, a 3,000 square foot, or 50 foot x 60 foot, addition would be constructed onto an existing industrial building. Ms. McPherson stated the property is located generally at 78th Avenue and Elm Street. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are all of the surrounding properties. Currently on the property is a 10,500 square foot building which houses the petitioner's business. Ms. McPherson stated the purpose of the special use permit as outlined in the City code outlines two standards for consideration of a special use permit request to increase the maximum lot coverage. These standards are the total net impact of the amount of hard surface on a site and whether or not all other ordinance requirements can be met by the request. Ms. McPherson stated staff looked at the proposal in terms of the hard surface impact. There will be a net increase of 3,477 square feet of hard surface with the addition and a driveway. The proposed addition would be added to the north of the existing building. Also proposed is a small driveway from the existing hard surface parking area in the alley to an overhead door in the new addition. The purpose is for loading and off-loading displays constructed by the petitioner. There is an opportunity to offset this increase by about 676 square feet by removing a portion of the front sidewalk that currently exists in front of the building. It appears that the main entrance will be toward the north with another entrance to the south. A door is proposed for the new addition and the sidewalk would be expanded. If the proposal is approved with the offset, a total impact of the hard surface would be 2,801 square feet. Ms. McPherson stated, in terms of other code requirements, the petitioner has submitted a landscape plan which meets the requirements of the code. Staff has recommended that additional landscape materials would assist in offsetting the impact of the addition and the increase in hard surface. Ms. McPherson stated, in terms of the zoning requirements in 2.02 PLAI�TNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 3 addition to the special use permit, the petitioner is also processing a variance request consisting of several variances including: l. Reducing the lot area from 1.5 acres to 27,000 square feet. 2. Reducing the side yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet. 3. Reducing the building setback from an alley right-of-way from 40 feet to 39 feet. 4. Reducing the number of parking stalls from 31 spaces to 15 spaces. 5. Reducing the parking setback from the side lot line from 5 feet to 0 feet, and from an alley right-of-way from 15 feet to 0 feet. Ms. McPherson stated, on May 28, the Appeals Commission reviewed the variances requested and recommended approval to the City Council of all variances with the stipulation that the special use permit request also be approved. Ms. McPherson stated, regarding the stormwater drainage, the engineering department has no items required of the petitioner. The impact is relatively small and the engineering department is not requesting any ponding or change on the site for stormwater drainage purposes. Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends denial of the request as it cannot meet the two standards set forth in the code. However, if the Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval of this request to the City Council, staff recommends the following stipulations: 1. The landscape plan shall be amended as follows: a. Substitute a rubrum maple for the proposed Marshall's ash. b. Add six flowering crabapples or plums; four in front and two in the green area in the rear. c. Add two additional Black Hills Spruce at the front (northwest corner of the building). 2. The green area on the east side of the addition shall not be converted to hard surface. 2.03 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 4 3. The sidewalk in front of the building shall be removed as indicated in the drawing "site modifications". 4. The petitioner acknowledges that the site is deficient in - parking and future reuse of the building will require a tenant with similar or less parking space demands or processing a special use permit for off-site parking. 5. Variance request, VAR #97-05, shall be approved. Mr. Oquist asked what two factors they were concerned about in Section 205.18.03.C.(4).(a) and (bj. Ms. McPherson stated the first is the total amount or impact of hard surface whether it is a net increase or a net decrease. The code would like it to be a net decrease. The second is whether or not the other ordinance requirements can be met. The code talks about drainage, landscaping, setback requirements, etc. Mr. Oquist stated the drainage and landscape requirements can be met. The setbacks were recommended for approval by Appeals. If you eliminate the sidewalk in the front, how do they get to the other doors? Is there not going.to be an extension of the sidewalk to the entrance in the new addition? Ms. McPherson stated the portion recommended to be removed is the triangular segments extending out from the front. The sidewalk along the building would remain. Mr. Ku�chle stated parking is a problem there. Mr. Kondrick asked how much increase in hard surface is there. Ms. McPherson stated the increase is a full 100. The petitioner when first proposing this project wanted an addition of 60 feet x 75 feet. That would have pushed the lot coverage over 50%. The petitioner reduced the size of the project one time in order not to exceed the 50o maximum. Mr. Randers stated his company makes trade show displays. The problem they run into is that they have grown over the years and need more space. As they are constructing the displays, the clients want to see them up. The displays are then packed and shipped. The more displays they get the more space they need. When they put up displays in the existing section of the building, they have to stop production on everything else. If they have assembly work on a job, they need to rent space beeause they do not have enough room. As far as parking, he is not looking to ada employees. They have three sales people who come and go and who 2.04 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 5 park in the front. They use only one entrance. It is okay with him to take out the sidewalk because they use only one entrance. They have five extra parking spaces and the neighbors park in their spaces now. They do not need more people. They just need more space for what they are now doing. Mr. Sielaff asked if there would be off street parking. Mr. Randers stated the sales representatives park on the street but they come and go during the day. Mr. Sielaff asked Mr. Randers if he owned the building or if he leased the building. Mr. Randers stated he owns the property. He purchased it for extra space and have been there since 1990. He owned a building earlier on 77th and Beech. They sold that and moved two blocks to their present location in 1990. Space is now a problem again: Mr. Sielaff asked if he anticipated growing even more. Mr. Randers stated he didn't want to. He wanted to remain this size. He did not anticipate expanding on this site. Mr. Kuechle asked.if the petitioner had any problems with the stipulations. Mr. Randers stated no. Mr. Kondrick asked if there was any problem with the landscape requirements. Mr. Randers stated no. There are no trees there now so it would probably look better. Mr. Oquist asked what the door to the south used for. � - Mr. Randers stated they purchased the building from ICA. They have an office there but never use that door. Mr. Oquist asked, if they say remove all the sidewalk with just a sidewalk along the building and from the door to the street, that would eliminate some of the hard surface. Mr. Randers stated that would probably be easier for them. He thought the doors were there because of the fire marshall. Mr. Saba asked how much more green space this would add. 2.05 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 6 Ms. McPherson stated this would reduced the hard surface by perhaps a few hundred square feet. It is not substantial compared to the size of the addition. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:50 P.M. Mr. Kuechle stated he would be inclined to recommend approval to the City Cour,.cil of this request with the five stipulations as outlined. Mr. Oquist stated a recommendation should also include the rearrangement of the sidewalk. Mr. Kuechle stated he thought this was covered by stipulation #3. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Oquist to recommend approval of Special Use Permit, SP #97-04, by Jim Randers, to allow nurseries or garden centers which require outdoor sales and storage on Lot 1, Block l, Home Depot Fridley Addition, generally located at 5650 Main Street N.E., with the following stipulations: l. The landscape plan shall be amended as follows: 2. 3. a. b. c. Substitute a rubrum maple for the proposed Marshall's ash. Add six flowering crabapples or plums; four in front and two in the green area in the rear. Add two additional Black Hills Spruce at the front (northwest corner of the building). The green area on the east side of the addition shall not be converted to hard surface. • The sidewalk in front of the building shall be removed as indicated in the drawing "site modifications". 4. The petitioner acknowledges that the site is deficient in parking and future reuse of the building will require a tenant with similar or less parking space demands or processing a special use permit for off-site parking. 5. Variance request, VAR #97-05, shall be approved. 2.�6 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 4 1997 pp,� � UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CAAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. McPherson stated the City Council would consider this item on June 23. 3. INFORMATIONAL HEARING REGARDING TELECOMMUNICATIONS SITES Mr. Hickok stated this is an issue talked about before, and they welcome the opportunity to have audience participation to get a better understanding of what the issues are and ask questions they may have. The telecommunications issue relates to cell phones, digital pagers, satellite dishes, etc. Mr. Hickok showed a video tape.which explained the telecommunications issues. The City Council has passed a moratorium on the construction of towers until December, 1997. Mr. Hickok stated in 1996 the Federal government passed a telecommunications act which eliminated the previous regulatory. boxes, increased competition and removed other regulatory barriers. Towers have been constructed around the nation whether they be monopoles or lattice-work towers. Cities are required to allow towers .in their communities. There are two approaches.as to where these towers.may be located. One method is market driven where telecommunications companies can choose where to locate a tower whether it be on public or private property. Another method is site specific where the sites are identified and parameters set for construction of these towers. Mr. Hickok stated staff prefers the site specific approach and has determined nine possible locations for towers as follows: 1) Well Site #�l on Cheri Lane; 2) a vacant parcel at the end of Cheri Lane; 3) water reservoir site at Lincoln and Slst; 4) Well Site #13 on East River Road; 5) Commons Park near the other utility structures; 6) Community Park adjacent to the industrial district and railroad track; 7) City garage and recycling center complex, 8) the existing water tower on Highway 65; and 9) Edgewater Park north of Mississippi Street. Mr. Oquist stated located on private telecommunications the video indicates there are some towers buildings. Are they owned by the companies and do they rent the space? Mr. Hickok stated yes to both questions. Mr. Kuechle asked what would happen to those in the City with the new ordinance plan. 2.�% PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 8 Mr. Hickok sta.ted the first choice would be to put them on high topographic locations and on high structures in the community. This would eliminate the need for higher tower structures. We do have provisions currently in the industrial ordinance that says by special use permit these could exist in industrial districts. If on top of a building, though, they would be an accessory to a principle use and would be accepted. That is why the McGlynn's tower was approved without a special use permit. The St. Paul water tower was approved in the same way. The Highway 65 water tower where they have a cellular array was approved by a lease agreement with the City and the City receives an annual fee for that. The one at Great Northern Industrial Park is the U.S. West Cellular line and was constructed in 1992 with a special use permit. Mr. Oquist asked if there were strategic places these towers needed to be and if eight sites would be enough. Mr. Hickok stated the way staff evaluated from a site specific standpoint is that the consultant has indicated we might see 17 requests for towers. Of those 17 vendors looking for a site, we could see co-location as a very strong possibility which would eliminate the need for 17 towers and drop the number back considerably. We would allow a number of users to go on one location. Staff is looking at eight sites. Conceivably on those eight sites there could be room for two or three vendors on each monopole. Mr. Sielaff asked what the ordinance would cover. Would it cover site locations or would it indicate what sort of site characteristics would need to exist? Mr. Hickok stated the ordinance would assure that towers are only constructed in the locations that have been selected. Initially, staff would identify a set of sites to be approved. It could be expanded in the future depending on the technology. Initially, it would be the sites that were selected and then set parameters much like the industrial buildings. There would be landscape standards, site location features, etc. Staff would probably on a site-by-site basis determine where the least visible site would be and most sensitive to residential areas. The ordinance would assure that we have the control necessary to say what we want on a specific site. The ordinance has not yet been drafted. The Planning Commission will have an opportunity to see that language when it is put together. Mr. Sielaff asked if the lattice construction would be allowed. 1 :. PLANNING CON�IISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 9 Mr. Hickok stated the lattice construction would not be allowed. Mr. Kondrick stated the telecommunications area is one where we have no choice. They want to get coverage in every community across the country. The City has a moratorium in order to provide time to make studies and make sure the towers are located in the right place. Mr. Hickok stated, as staff evaluated the market driven approach, they looked at it and determined this approach is still up for grabs, although staff prefers the site specific approach. The market driven approach would be one of vendors coming in and saying they have selected a site and then going through the required processes. It goes back to an earlier question of what needs to be done in terms of placement. The City has to make a reasonable and realistic effort. to accommodate the technology. We have control of where it is located as long as we are reasonable in our approach. We have hired a consultant to determine what kind of demand we will have which is based on the Federal licenses that have been granted. Based on the demand, we can make a reasonable effort to place poles. Each tower has a certain radius. There may be a tower across the river, for example, that is directed toward the surge tower site on Alden Way. Then another tower in Edgewater Park or Community Park would have to direct their equipment in such a way to make the system work. Hickok stated he believes they have set a good pattern with these eight locations to make it work and we can determine the locations. Mr. Kondrick stated, with the advances in technology, what about the future whereby they are about to make these more powerful. What is the possibility of a downsize? If we granted ten sites today, what are the chances of there being a need for five sites tomorrow? Mr. Hickok stated this was a concern initially about getting geared up too big and finding out they would need something smaller. The technology has been on the horizon for a long time. In talking to the vendors and our consultant, there is not another similar technology on the horizon at this time. Folks are entering into 20 year leases with the expectation that the need for these towers is not going to go away. The technology is very different. Many uses are digital and work best under low power, so the poles being located close together don't need a lot of power to project from one to the next. That also gives the clearest signal. Now we are seeing the large towers or T-1 towers. What we will probably see are T-2 towers which are smaller but there would be more of them. Receivers may get smaller yet to the point where they may piggyback on existing 2.09 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 10 features. Mr. Kondrick asked, of the sites selected, what do the consultants feel will be the tallest tower necessary in this community. Mr. Hickok stated the City is fortunate enough to have several topographic shifts. The height depends on the site line. If you have one tower on a hill and another in the valley, the lower one will have to be much taller. We are expecting pole heights to be 75 feet at higher levels to 150 feet in lower locations. Mr. Saba asked if there were construction codes for these towers in terms of safet� issues. Mr. Hickok stated yes, that is one of the beauties of the monopole technology as staff sees it. Staff toured a factory. The mono- poles with the equipment attached are designed for wind loads of 120 miles per hour (mph). They have been tested in Hurricane Andrew and have not had a failure to date. In Minnesota, the wind load expectations are 80 mph at the high end. The monopole technology observed meets the expectations of our Building staff. Poles will be required to have structural engineering data and certification_to assure integrity. Mr. Kondrick stated, because parks are being considered as possible locations, there may be a building constructed at the base of the towers to house electrical, etc. Are we going to be able to insist that the building be of a certain size, of a certain construction material, etc.? Mr. Hickok stated yes. Mr. Sielaff asked if other cities are doing ordinances. Mr. Hickok stated there are some ordinances out there. There is a spectrum of responses to this technology. Bloomington has an ordinance �hat they are utilizing. White Bear Lake has taken the approach that the towers will be on public land. Those ordinances are available for review. Mr. Kondrick stated Edina is also meeting about this issue. Mr. Sielaff asked if we need to coordinate this with other cities in the area. Mr. Hickok stated their early discussion pointed to a regional approach. It seems that a regional/metro approach would have been the way to do this. We need to make a reasonable accommodation for the technology. Which tower selected in Fridley would 2.y� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 11 probably be determined by how close a vendor's towers are in a bordering community. Mr. Kondrick stated, for example, if Columbia Heights wants to have a pole in this location and ours is there but it is too far away, do you then have to move your pole? Mr. Saba asked, in conjunction with that, if Columbia Heights has a pole and another company wants put in a pole in Fridley, how can we coordinate with Columbia Heights, Blaine, etc. Mr. Hickok stated we have to be reasonable in the number. That is determined based on not having knowledge of where they are going to be in other communities. Mr. Kuechle stated he was not clear as to whether there still would be antenna allowed on private buiidings by special use permit. Mr. Hickok stated the ordinance would probably repeal the existing language. Right now, that is frozen by the moratorium. He thought the City had used up their high sites. Short of the water tower, McGlynn's, and the surge tower, there is not a lot there that has the height necessary. Mr. Oquist asked if staff knew the status of what surrounding communities were doing. Are they in the same situation? Perhaps we should be showing neighboring communities where are sites will be so we don't have a"farm" of antennas. Mr. Hickok stated Columbia Heights and Hilltop have been experiencing construction of towers. In the other communities, there are a number of moratoriums. Ms. McPherson stated, to her knowledge, Coon Rapids enacted a moratorium about the same time as Fridley. However, Coon Rapids has installed a number of antenna sites. One is to the west of the Northtown Financial Plaza. She thought the moratorium there was for 18 months. Coon Rapids has been realizing they have been issuing permits. They have two towers within 10 or 15 feet of each other which happened because they did not have a coordinated approach. They are now finding out they have multiple tower sites. Mr. Kondrick asked if the moratoriums would all come due at the end of the year or if the moratoriums were different for different cities. How is the government allowing that? � Mr. Hickok stated the Federal government is allowing that and sees 2.11 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 12 that as reasonable for cities to have time to establish where it is they want and need the technology to go. Mr. Kondrick asked if there was a deadline. Mr. Hickok stated this falls back to what is reasonable. At the point where a City is using this to avoid getting structures, the vendors will probably challenge and the courts will decide. Mr. Grandstrand stated he thought Mr. Hickok had done a pretty good job of illustrating the locations that are appropriate for towers and ant�nnas for telecommunications sites. As he watched the video, eve��ything seemed to be commercial and industrial sites. However, out of the eight sites proposed, two of them are in the heart of residential districts - the Cheri Lane well house and the vacant parcel at the end of Cheri Lane which is a City park. The sites are relatively small sites and are both City properties, but he would guess the sites are 100 feet square. They are located adjacent to homes. If you consider the fact that putting in a 75 foot to 150 foot high tower 50 to 100 feet from his back door he feels a bit concerned about having that kind of a structure that close and located within a residential area. He is curious that two of the sites are located in residential areas. Perhaps the commission could respond to those issues. Mr. Kondrick asked how to get the coverage needed in the area where needed. Mr. Hickok stated, in all cases, these are City owned properties. We believe we have the best control over the maintenance of the towers and what happens to the towers on our property. Staff had a GIS map made that showed every piece of public property throughout the City. Staff went through every one of those pieces and asked if the site was big enough, its proximity to other things, etc. These two sites are in an area where we don't have a lot of land area but need coverage. There are some small parks. If they contain a playground or activity area, it may not be appropriate as a site. The land area on the site behind Target is wooded and contains a park. It contains a small building for hockey storage. It is a wooded site and.has the possibility of putting that base in the.wooded area which would mitigate eye level site from the ground and still fill a void in that area. It is not in the midst of.a playground and has some natural cover. The well site is in the same area. It is an open site that does not have another activity besides the well. It could accommodate a combination well building and equipment building for the tower. It does have land area and it does not have a contradictory uses. Mr. Kondrick asked if there was commercial property in that area. 2.�2 I PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 13 Mr. Hickok stated the site is along I-694 and the commercial area is further to the east. This site is surrounded by residential, but it is not unusual to see that. This is a technology that has been determined to be safe by all Federal standards: It is so safe that the Federal government has said that cities will not be responsible for and should not be involved in trying to regulate health concerns. In many cases, the wattage is equivalent to a 100 watt light bulb for each user. The signal is clear because of the low power. Cellular is about three times that. Technology runs in different bands. That is another thing the Federal government insures. Mr. Kondrick stated they had talked about the equipment building that needs to be at the base of the tower to house the electronics. We need to have a vehicle access to get to the building for work and/or maintenance. That is another consideration. Putting a tower in a park is a major concern. They do not want to upset the nature of activities in parks. He did not know how that would be arrived at. He did not think there were any harmful effects. Mr. Oquist asked if staff had given consideration to putting a tower across I-694 at the Lake Pointe site. Mr. Hickok stated there is great potential that once a building is there that would work. There is a master plan approved for Lake Pointe. It could work on top of a building but a free standing ' structure is contrary to the master plan. Mr..Oquist stated it could be incorporated into the master plan. He thought that should be given consideration because it is not in a park or residential area. It is an open area. It may be a good alternative to these two sites. Mr. Grandstrand stated he understood Lake Pointe was a large area a.nd the development for that area was a large commercial building. It is surrounded by public roadways. There is an area to the east of the immediate site for the building between Lake Pointe Drive and the ramp to I-694 that is a prime site. It is a smaller area. It is not an aesthetic issue and may be appropriate for consideration. Mr. Saba stated he thought this would be preferable to residential. Mr. Noutsby stated he was a lifetime resident on Madison Street. He and his family moved there before Target. The City Council minutes from back then indicate the City Council made a verbal 2.13 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 14 commitment to the property owners there that they would dedicate the area behind Target as a park to be a buffer zone for Target. He does not want trees taken down or damage done to the wildlife or the buffer. He asked if staff had taken that into consideration. This is a park and the City has the right to build what they want on a public park. He does not want the City to build a commercial building. Mr. Saba stated it is not something we want to build. The problem is that the telecommunication act as passed by Congress took away the right from the city to say no. We have two choices. We can either let the telecommunications companies decide where they want to go or we can preselect sites. The Planning Commission and staff feel that preselection of sites is in the best interest so we can get input and take that input in deciding the final locations. This is excellent input. He would prefer to stay away from residential area. Mr. Noutsby stated in their neighborhood they don't need a tower. As far as no health risk, he has heard that too many times.in his lifetime. At the time of the Korean War, they were sprayed with DDT and told it was perfectly safe. When the major power lines were installed, they said it would not hurt anyone but they found out later it was harmful. This may be the same. He hopes they are right and that people will feel no effects in 20 years. He felt it should be kept away from the neighborhoods. Ms. Charchenko stated she lived next to the well site on Cheri Lane. She would just as soon not have it there. This is a residential area. The Lake Pointe site would be perfect. She lives right next door to this site and does not think it is a good idea. Mr. Britven stated he lives near Commons Park. Is the installation going to go on the water tower in that location? Mr. Hickok stated it is possible and that is something they would consider. Water tower applications are very common. It is not certain. The City would go back to the Park & Recreation Commission before doing anything in a park. Mr. Britven asked if these are strictly relay systems or are these bases. Mr. Hickok stated their understanding is that these would be relays and not bases. The closest example of a base is the Arden Hills site that has buildings at the base which serves as a.base that sends out signals to the secondary towers. If he understands the question correctly, it is whether or not we will have'a 2.14 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 4 1997 PAGE 15 similar impact on base station is a. here. Only those building. the land. He thought what they would see on a large building(s). They are looking at towers tower sites that have cellular will have a Mr. Britven stated, when these are constructed, he thought they need to consider the maximum wattage. These emit radiation. It would be interesting to see if you could regulate the power per unit area in milliwatts by the different vendors throughout the poles. He does not have cable TV. Would this interfere with the regular TV channels? Mr. Hickok stated their understanding is.that it runs on different bands completely and will not interfere with the other bands. Mr. Britven's previous points are clearly spelled out in the Federal regulations that.cities cannot control power and interference. That is controlled by the Federal government. Mr. Oquist stated he would expect that, if there is interference, they are going to have to put some filters out there. Mr. Britven stated, with these poles and multiple vendors, he thought the city should have some sort of regulation on maximum wattage if you get multiple vendors on a particular pole. He asked staff to explain more about the wattage. Mr. Hickok stated there are a number of pieces of literature that are available either from the industry itself or from third parties that have done separate analysis of this issue. This particular piece of information is from the Personal Communications Industry Association which talks about structural components of the towers, the frequency or EMF, etc. Under the EMF, it states that many wireless services operate at a low power level. For instance, cellular and PCS transmitters operate at 100 watts or less. Paging transmitters and two-way radio antenna seldom operate at power levels higher than 100 watts. On multi- use towers, the systems that operate at higher power levels are usually located towards the top of the structure and the lower powered cellular and PCS transmitters are located toward the bottom. With three vendors on a tower, we might see a wattage that would be approximately 1500 watts. Likely, we would see a mix of cellular at 300 watts, pagers at 500 watts, and PCS applications at 100 watts. With a height of 150 feet, it would be reasonable to expect three vendors on a pole. Mr. Grandstrand stated his first concern was aesthetics. With the latest discussion he is having another concern which is the introduction of commercial traffic into a residential area. If we have one or two towers and have vendors that have to access those 2.15 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 16 areas with some frequency, he thought that would introduce into the picture commercial traffic on residential streets. They have a unique neighborhood with children playing in the yards so that brings in another issue to consider. For those that are not familiar with the neighborhood, this is a rather isolated area. It is bound on the west by 7th, Madison on the east, and three cross streets T 53rd, 54th, and Cheri Lane. There is one way in and one way out. The infrastructure is there for residential traffic, but if you start adding to it he did not know how much commercial traffic could be supported. Mr. Kondrick stated he thought the service vehicle would be a van. He did not think they are talking about a lot of trucks back and forth. Mr. Grandstrand stated, as far as frequency, that may be more of an issue. He did not know who made the decision to construct the sports storage facility. That building in itself has introduced so much more traffic in that area. They will see people there once a month, and they will see vehicles come in there by the dozen. Everyone that has children in a sports program is serviced by that facility and will come in one car after another for a period of an hour to an hour and a half. People will turn around in the driveways. The children have come in, swung on trees and broken limbs. These are things that are out of place with the neighborhood. It is just another item to bring in traffic that does not have business in the neighborhood. Ms. Amundson stated her question was about safety concerns. When she goes into the bank, there is a sign asking people no to use cell phones. Mr. Hickok stated the same is true on airplanes. Where there is any ehance that this would interfere with a security system or flight/safety systems, you will be asked to turn it off. On this technology, you have more power in your hands than on the pole itself. This is an issue that is very clear in the FCC regulations about how the tower is structured and what kind of impacts this power will have on the surrounding area. It is negligible. Mr. Saba stated he works in the network industry. The big problem is getting oscillator chips which generate the signals. That signal may interfere with the security systems in a bank or on an airline. Ms. McPherson stated it may not be a case of the actual electronic technology although she has noticed more and more places are asking people to turn off their phones. It may be just a 2.ys PLANNING CONIl�IISSION MEETING JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 17 situation of the bank trying to create a quiet space to work with clients. It may not be a health risk but it may be an issue of consideration.: Ms. Amundson asked what is happening with New Brighton and other cities. Is anyone challenging this? Ms. McPherson stated she did not know what New Brighton was doing. She will check. Mr. Hickok stated they were seeing a broad spectrum of responses. Roseville is getting a number of towers and they �eem to be doing a good job of regulating where they are going. Shoreview and some of the other communities have taken a closer look. They have had some experience with radio towers of a different type that is causing them to slow down and take a look. A moratorium is a popular response to the FCC regulations. At the time staff asked the City Council to consider a moratorium, Washington County was about the only other moratorium staff was aware of. Since then Coon Rapids and some other communities also have.a moratorium. Ms. Amundson stated she thought they should look at other cities and what they are doing. Ms. Grandstrand stated, if these forums continue, more of the people in the areas where these are planned should be notified. Persons within 350 feet are notified. She thought the whole area should be notified rather than just those within 350 feet. Mr. Saba stated a notice is placed in the newspaper. Ms. Grandstrand stated it is different if the notice is received at your home. Like an advertisement, if you put it.in different forms, more people will see it. Mr. Noutsby stated from the comments from the people we don't want this in our neighborhood. What can we do to stop it? He thought it should be goinq into a commercial area. He does not care if it needs to be higher. They don't need anything more in their neighborhood. That small area is their buffer from Target and commercial. There in not much left for them. Mr. Kondrick stated these comments will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. Mr. Hickok stated they are cognizant of putting towers in " residential areas. As an example, there are three points south of I-694 that have been chosen. All of this has been done in a way that it takes the City, lays out the geographic area, and tries to 2.17 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 18 find locations that match the technology and match the reasonableness test we have to pass. Folks from the area of Lincoln and 51st probably would also say they did not want this in a residential area. We cannot avoid residential areas. While this is information gathering, he did want to point out that we are at a bit of a disadvantage when it comes to being reasonable in our coverage expectations so we are considering areas we may not have considered before but that have location features that are necessary. It is not a contradictory use as they see it. The screening would have to be taken into consideration. If it determined that a park is an appropriate location, the Park & Recreation Commission has asked that it come bac.k to them and that they take a specific look at it. It will be an elaborate review process before a tower is placed in a park. We may not be able to assure people we can keep them out of residential areas. Mr. Grandstrand thanked the staff and Planning Commission'for the opportunity to express .their opinions and share their thoughts. Ms. McPherson stated she checked to see what other communities are doing. Staff have talked with Mounds View, Richfield, Brooklyn Center, New Brighton, Cr�stal, and Brooklyn Park. New Brighton has adopted a zoning ordinance amendment. It appears they have gone through the process. Based on their matrix, towers are allowed in commercial and industrial districts, in park areas, and it appears that single family districts are considered. It does not appear that they are processing special use permits, but they do have some strict standards on height, setbacks, support buildings, etc. Mr. Sielaff stated he would like to see some close scrutiny by us on what other cities are doing. We have control over what we do here. He is concerned about what other cities are doing. If ' other cities put towers in commercial areas close to our boundaries, it could be close to our residential areas. He thought that could impact Fridley. Mr. Oquist stated, if another community does that, we cannot stop it or do anything about it. He thought we needed to be aware of it. He thought the communities in this area need to form a committee to say this is what we are doing and coordinate those efforts. He thought they could have some control through coordination. 4. 1998 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT GOALS & OBJECTIVES Ms. McPhe�son stated this item is the presentation by Ms. Dacy as made before the City Council_ That was to have been a video taped presentation. Unfortunately, the videotape is on loan to one of 2.18 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JUNE 4, 1997 PAGE 19 the Councilmembers. This item will be presented at the June 18 meeting. 5. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 23, 1997 MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Ms. Saba, to receive the minutes of the Appeals Commission meeting of April 23, 1997. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON ICONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSI,Y. 6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 5, 1997 MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Oquist, to receive the minutes of the Parks & Recreation Commission meeting of May 5, 1997. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALI� VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE JUNE 4, 1997, P?�ANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:08 P.M. Respectfully submitted, `Z� �� L� � � � Lavonn Cooper Recording Secretary 2.19 s I G N' IN S H E E T PLANNING COMMIggIpN j�iEETING� Wednesday, June 4, 1997 . 2.2� CITY OF FRIDLEY PROJECT SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Carla Bustrum, representing Onan Corporation, requests that a variance be granted to increase the maximum square footage of all signs for a development from 80 sq. ft. to 161 sq. ft. If the variance is granted, the text on the three existing monument signs will be changed. SUMMARY OF ISSUES: Section 214.12.02.B allows a maximum size sign of 80 sq. ft. per development. Located on the property are three monument signs constructed of poured-in-place concrete. The supporting structures of the signs were constructed in 1969. The text on the signs has been changed twice since that time. The petitioner has met the four conditions outlined in Section 214.21.02. A-D of the Sign Code which must be met prior to granting a variance from the literat provisions of the Sign Code. RECOMMENDATION TO APPEALS COMMISSION: Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend approval of the variance to the City CounciL APPEALS COMMISSION ACTION: The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the variance request to the City Council. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: Staff cecommends that the City Council concur with the Appeals Commission action. !� Project Summary VAR #97-07, Onan Corporation Page 2 PROJECT DETAILS Petition For: Location of Property: Legal Description of Property: Size: Topography: Existing Vegetation: Existing Zoning/Platting: Availability of Municipal Utilities: Vehicular Access: Pedestrian Access: Engineering Issues: Comprehensive Planning Issues: Public Hearing Comments: A variance to increase the maximum sign area for a development from 80 square feet to 161 squa�e feet 1400 - 73rd Avenue Tracts A-D, Registered Land Survey 114 123 acres Flat Typical suburban; trees, sod, shrubs M-2, Heavy Industrial; Registered Land Survey 114, 1988 Connected 73ro Avenue, Central Avenue 73�d Avenue bikeway The Zoning and Comprehensive Plans are consistent in this location. None 3.02 Project Summary VAR #97-07, Onan Corporation Page 3 ADJACENT SITES: WEST: zoning: M-1, Light Industrial Land Use: Multi-tenant industrial SO TH: Zoning: M-2, Heavy Industrial Land Use: Industrial EAST: Zoning: Unknown Land Use: City of New Brighton NORTH: Zoning: R-2, Two-Family Land Use: Residential Dwelling R-3, General Multiple Dwelling Site Planning Issues: REQUEST Carla Bustrum, representing Onan Corporation, requests that a variance be granted to increase the maximum square footage of all signs for a development from 80 sq. ft. to 159 sq. ft. If the variance is granted, the text on the three existing monument signs will be changed SITE DESCRIPTION/HISTORY The subject property is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of 73'� and Central Avenues. The total site area is 123 acres and is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial. Located on the property is a manufacturing/research and development facility which was constructed in 1969. Three monument signs, also constructed in 1969, are located on the property: (1) located at the intersection of 73`� and Central Avenues, 13.7 feet by 7.5 feet {103 square feet}; (2) located adjacent to 73`� Avenue along the north property line at an entry driveway into the complex, 7.7 feet by 3.79 feet {29 square feet}; and (3) located adjacent to Central Avenue at an entry driveway into the complex, 7.7 feet by 3.79 feet {29 square feet}. (See attached maps for locations.) The supporting structures of the signs are constructed of poured-in-place concrete with non-illuminated letters attached. The letters have been changed twice, once in 1989 and once in 1994. Both change- outs occurred without variances. ANALYSIS 3.03 Project Summary VAR #97-07, Onan Corporation Paqe 4 Code Section Section 214.12.02.B requires a maximum size of eighty (80) square feet in area per development. Public purpose served by this requirement is to control visual pollution and the excessive use of signs. Prior to granting variances from the literal provisions of Chapter 214 (Sign Code), the applicant must prove the following conditions (see attached statement from petitioner): A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to other property in the same vicinity and district. As stated earlier, the property is zoned M-2, Heavy IndustriaL It is surrounded on the west and south sides with additional industrial zoning. Other developments in the area are much smaller when compared to Onan's 123 acres. Medtronic, directly to the south, is closest in size to Onan and has monument signs located on both the west and east campuses. This provides an opportunity for up to 160 square feet for the Medtronic ground signs. These signs comply with the ordinance requirement. The subject property is unique in both size and setback when compared to surrounding industrial developments. Unity Hospital, also similar in size, received a variance in 1990 to increase the size of an identification sign. B. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and district, but which is denied the property in question. Denial of the variance would not prevent Onan from installing a free-standing monument sign of 80 square feet in area. However, an 80 square foot sign is out of proportion with the size of Onan's development. The ordinance does not address "campus" type developments in its standards. Medtronic, the most similar development in the vicinity, has two monument signs, each within the 80 square foot requirement; however, Medtronic has the advantage of a split campus on two sides of Central Avenue. If the square footage of the proposed Onan text is calculated, it totals 44.9 square feet. C. That the strict application of the Chapter would constitute an unnecessary hardship. Strict application of the Chapter would require Onan to install a monument sign of 80 square feet. Smaller directional signs may need to be located at the driveway 3.04 Project Summary VAR #97-07, Onan Corporation Pa4e 5 entrances on 73`d and Central Avenues. Additional signage could be placed on the building which would assist in identifying the Onan complex. The building, however, is set back approximately 373 feet from the Central Avenue right-of-way. The visibility of such wall signage may be obstructed by the building setback and the evergreen plant materials located along the street. D. That the granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or detrimental to the prope�ty in the vicinity or district in which the property is located. The existing monument signs have been located in their present locations since 1969. To staff's knowledge and � review of the file, no complaints have been received from adjacent property owners regarding the size or location of the signs. The signs do not impede visibility of drivers leaving or entering the site or maneuvering on the adjacent roadways. In addition, the signs are not illuminated; therefore, the sign at the intersection of 73`� and Central Avenues has no impact on adjacent residential prope�ties to the north. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPEALS COMMISSION Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend approval of the variance to the City Council. APPEALS COMMISSION ACTION: The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the variance request to the City Council. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the Appeals Commission action. 3.05 Sign Variance Conditions Response: A) Our 123 acre commercial/manufacturing facility "monument" signs are proportionate to our building size and green areas.. The proposed sign changes only affect the lettering on the monuments which have been in existence since 1969. B) Onan's visitors, suppliers and customers need to readily identify our location. These signs provide the necessary identification and are less intrusive than Super America's and other commerciaf/industrial properties along 73rd and Old Central. C) Denial of this variance would result in loss of "corporate identity" for the Corporation and its employees. Customers, visitors, and suppliers would find it more difficult to identify the property. Additionally, smaller signage would be aesthetically undesirable with relation to the building and green area surrounding the facility. D) Since their installation in 1969 there has been no indication that they have interfered with traffic sight lines and, to our knowledge, no neighborhood residence has expressed concern about them. 3.06 � � � � � � ; � � ,, , ,� 1, . . _ R1 � ; , , e. : ; �� +.� � ; � -. , . _ . . � ._ , � �� , �� , : . : � �i W — — -� , � � - , , , - , ': � 13 - i a �I i � , � � _� i I � ; ' .- � R1 � , � - P I R1 ; . - � , ,, � , _ , ��w,� - - _ __� I � � �t., l - fl��P - * ; ark . � � - --- � � � � � � I - --- --- � . _ . . � i � r . � ��,,r R1 � -1 �.�.�,.� �„� -_� � - � i _ . � � ;� � _ 1 i � i�' — ��.---$ � � � , �, ��_ ; R1 ' � T� j ,��- R4 � C3� R4 z �C1 � 1 -�� l �R1 �_� � _ - _ 1—�- -�-- R1 1��_� � '�� ' ��n� �n� �n� �.n�� n. ... [_�� 1 o�i F-= � _1-�-� ! �-�-�--�a��--�T ��1 M1 C2 � � � h � NI2 ♦ �� i , P� i ` � ♦ _/ � .., �-----r— �, �► � � J � t �� r �� r � � �,� � t •• `�� - � � R, ��_ ��r� I � - �� p - za,�� o�;�a«�: J R-1 - � Family Units � R-2 - Two Farrily lkrts � R-3 - C,er�er'al M�tipie Ur�ts � R-4 - Nbbile I-brre Parks 0 PUD - �anned Unit Developrtx,�nt � S1 - Nyde Park Neighborhood � sz - �� a��d -1 G 1 - Local Business _' G2 - General Business ] G3 - General �aPP��J ["� GR1 - C��eral Office ' NF�i - �gM lndustnal _ _ i N�2 - f �'�1' �ndustnal � M3 - Outdoor Irrtensive I leavy I nd RR - Railrcaacfs P - Riblic Faalities --- ' WATER . Poc�-rr-oF-wAv • IVI2 � �91 , a � � ' ! , � � ,� �� I� �� 0 --. ------- -- N_____ "__ '_--_' VAR #97-07, 1400 73rd Avenue ; A I __ - — – — � 2/26✓97 I This request, by Onan Corporation, - _ - _ _ __ ---___--- - , I Carrpiled and dra�n�n from dfiaal necords based would allow the letters to be changed ,' , o„ �,�,ar,�,,,o. �o a� �,;�,v�, ��x;� on three existing rn�nument signs. ;�e �rz��ss t�r� �r, �� «�� i , anoes acbpted and effedive as oF 2/17/97. � Approximate location of si ns ' "1e �'t'' °' F��e'' � �'Ce" �' �°� t° �- , g � vide the most up-to-date ir�formation available. ' The data presertted here is subjed to diange. The City of Fridley will riok be responsible for 3.07 ur�fioreseen errors or usage of this documerrt. � � r� . �� * b� 0 0 0 0 0 0 � w �� b �# �� s Y � � � �< Y W � � y,�� . n ��x -�., � � �u \� � � � � � � � a � O � � > � O � 1 O Z � _ � � � �-' � � � � �anv �x.uv� � � ` 3 - � '� I � — C'7 O C'� � I I ti t�! N � � � � � N � � ; i �� ; - �; � , , �-� � : � � , : ��'� '� . �> .: . . _ . . � ' ' � � `��i-� � � i � �'� �-� w � . - N !;,V I t f� t V l � _ J lv iv'....1,:.� - � y Y4 c t� � i� w w` r �. = �� co - T I n� � � 0 W � LJ J � J = J —I � Q � � � Q W � W W JUU �z -� � O W z�v zJ= Q � U�� w r' v� x � � W o� !— � G wzQ �O� 3.09 N V � N � Z r � � W W 0 � � � �� N � � � � � � zz � O � m � z � z J � C.� w� � �z z° O� �o � � � r� c� _ � � � r 00 CO Z � i �° �a � � � 3 z Q W � � � �J �._--_ ° -___� E o� �l: � a o� �.� �� ,�,�� FQ � �orr77 �u: u, 0� 67� F5 < J ' i DI i T I d- \ T J Q U C!� C � � VJ zz O� >z ww J � W � �- � z� � `� �� f'TY OF FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETtNG, JUNE 11, 1997 ROLL CALL: Chairperson Kuechle calied the June 11, 1997, Appeals 7:30 p.m, ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Larry Kuechle, Ken Caro! Beauiieu errie Mau e Savage Others Present: Michele Pherson, Planning Assistant Caria strom, Onan Corporation N ood "V1/oody°� Nelson, Onan Corporation meeting to order at MO---N Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Mau, to approve the Ma 2g 1 Commis on minutes as written. Y , 997, Appeals N A VOICE VOTE, ALL YOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLAR MOTION CARRIED UNANIMpUSLY. ED �• P B�I HEARIN : C N DERAT ON OF VARIANCE RE UEST VA BY ONAN ORPORqT�ON: R #97-07 Per Section 214.12.02.B of the Fridley City Code, to increas from 80 square feet to 159 square feet to ailow a chan e of e size of a sign existing signs on Tracts q_p, R�istered Land Survey 114, generall r locatehree 9400 - 73rd Avenue N.E. Y d at M�— T�4N_ by Ms. Mau, seconded by Dr. Vos, to waive the reading of the ubf notice and to open the pubiic hearing. p ic hearing UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE D THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:32 p.M. EC�RED Ms. McPherson stated the reques# is by Onan Corporation located at _ Avenue. The request is to increase the maximum size of a free-standin s400 73rd square feet to 961 square feet. If the variance request is approved, the tegt on� hreo existing monument signs will be replaced. e Ms. McPherson stated the property is located at 73rd and Central Avenues. north of Medtronic, and is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as is Medtronic. The eh ssite is other 3.10 APPEAL COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 11, 1997 PAGE 2 industrial zoning to the west. To the north is predominanUy residential zoning with a mixture of single family, two family, and multiple family dwellings zoning. Research and development and manufacturing facilities are located on the property. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner proposes not only �eplacement of the monument signs but also proposes to install a new wall sign. The wall sign complies with the code requirements. Drawings were displayed showing the design and text of the signs. She stated monument signs are located at the intersection of 73rd and Central and at the westerly and northerly driveways into the complex. Ms. McPherson stated the signs were originally constructed and installed in 1969. There are three signs on the property. The letters were changed in 1981 and in 1994. No variances were granted to change the text on these signs. Prior to granting a sign variance, the following four provisions in the code must be met by the petitioner: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circums#ances applicable to the. property or to the intended use that do not apply genera(ly to other property in the same vieinity and district. Ms. McPherson stated that the size of the site is 123 acres. It is the largest development in this vicinity with the exception of the Medtronic site. Medtronic enjoys the advantage that its property is split into finro campuses with a monument sign for each half of the campus. Medtronic's monument signs meet the code requirements. FMC on East River Road is probably the next comparable development. FMC has multiple signs all in excess of 80 square fieet. 6. That the variance is necessary for the presenration and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity. and district, but which is denied the properly in question. Ms. McPherson stated that deniai of the request would Iimit Onan to one 80 square foot sign. !n comparison to the size of the overall development, 80 square #eet could be considered out of propo�tion with the entire Onan complex. In calculating the total square footage of the text only, the actual text is 44.9 square feet. They are making some assumptions as to why the previous change in text did not require variances. She believed it was because they looked at the smallest geometric area which encompasses the text and did not look at the monument structure itself to which the text is attached. C. That the strict application of the Chapter would constitute an unnecessary hardship. Ms. McPherson stated strict application of the Chapter would require Onan to install one sign of 80 square feet or reduce the size of the monuments to meet the 80 square foot 3.11 requirement. Wa11 signs are an option fo� Onan; however, there is lack of visibili for w v signs due to the landscaping and the setback of the building from the public ri ht� - ai� g of way- �� That the g�anting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare or detrimental to the property in the vicinity or dis pcbin which the property is located. Ms. McPherson stated the signs have been in place since 1969. She reviewed thoroughly and no complaints regarding the signs have been logged. Staff the file receive any cails regarding this request by the petitioner. In addition, the si ns are did not illummated internally or via ground illumination so the impact to the residential �ot to the north is minimal. properties Ms. McPherson stated staff recommends approval of the request to the Ci Co no stipulations. ty uncil with Dr. Vos stated the public hearing notice states 159 square feet and staff state square feet. He asked why there was a discrepancy. d 161 Ms: McPherson stated that in caiculating the square footage for the public hearin the dimension on the drawing measures 964.5 inches. She rounded that number When they recalculated the figure, they added the half in 9 notice, difFerence of two square feet. ch back in. Therefore, the e is a Dr. Vos asked if the signs wouid be on the existing monuments. Ms. McPherson stated, yes. Mr. Kuechte asked for the square footage of the largest sign including the monum ent. Ms. McPherson stated the largest sign is approximately 103 square feet. Mr. Neison stated staff had done a good job of reviewing the request. He was a' there were any questions. vailable if Dr. Vos asked why Onan was changing the signs. Mr. Nelson stated the change in signs is the third change and is being done for identity. Their manufacturing processes are changing. There is an identit icorporate they want to address. y ssue that MO— T�ON by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Mau, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE D THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLQSED AT 7:40 p.M CLARED 3.12 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING. JUNE 11. 1997 PAGE 4 Dr. Vos stated the Onan has been a good citizen in the City and they are coming to the Appeals Commission for a variance request to change an existing sign. He has no objection. Ms. Mau stated she agreed. The company has been a good citizen in the City. They keep their property looking nice. She had no objection. Mr. Kuechle stated he concurred. There are a couple of issues here. One is the amount of square footage of sign in proportion to the size of the property which is really quite small. If you see one sign, you really have to look a long way for the next sign. In addition, the signs as shown have a small amount of text and are just for information. He would recommend approval. MOTION by Ms. Mau, seconded by Dr. Vos, to recommend approval of Variance Request, VAR #97-07, by Onan Corporation, to increase the size of a sign from 80 square feet to 159 square feet to allow a change of letters on three existing signs on Tracts A-D, Registered Land Survey 114, generally located at 1400 - 73rd Avenue N.E. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. , � Ms. McPherson provided an update on Planing Commission and AD,JOURNMENT: MOTION by Ms. Mau, seconded by Dr. Vos, to UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING A THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE/ . MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:44 P.Nf: Respectfully submitted, c � � c�.-,.� �) L vonn Cooper � Recording Se�ary � � � the meeting. actions. CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED = 11, 1997, APPEALS COMMISSION 3.13 MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: June 19, 1997 � TO: William Bums, City Manager�� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resotution Declaring a Development Agreement Befinreen the City of Fridley, Maynard Nielson, and Robert DeGardner Breach The Fridley City Council at its June 9, 1997 meeting directed staff to prepare the attached resolution for City Council approval. The attached resolution declares the 1984 development agreement befinreen the City of Fridley, Maynard Nielson, and Robert DeGardner breach. It also directs staff to take the required steps to rezone the subject property located at 61St Avenue and East River Road from R-3, General Multiple Family Dwelling back to R-1, Single Family Dwelling. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached resolution. u ►f�T�TID M-97-286 4.01 RESOLUTION NO. - 1997 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FRIDL�Y, MINNESOTA DECLARING A BREACH OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF FRIDLEY AND TWO OTHER PARTIES BY REASON OF THE NONPERFORNSANCE BY THOSE PARTIES OF THEIR OBLIGATIONS THEREUNDER, AND RESERVING FOR THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THOSE REMEDIES AS MAY BE AVAILABLE TO IT BY LAW WHEREAS, the City of Fridley, Minnesota, entered into an Agreement (hereinafter, the "Agreement") with Maynard Nielson and Robert DeGardner (hereinafter, "The Developers") in 1984, a copy of which is attached herewith and incorporated herein by reference, for the purpose of effecting and faciiitating the development of a parcel of land legally described as Lots 3 and 21, not taken for street purposes, and all of Lots 4 through 10 and 14 through 20 of Block 20, Fridley Park, as recorded at the Office of the Anoka County Recorder; and WHEREAS, the City was required, pursuant to the Agreement, to rezone the above-described parcel to R-3, which was by the City Council on or about September 24, 1984; and WHEREAS, in consideration for this promise and action by the City, the Developers agreed under the terms of the Agreement to undertake certain actions, including, among others, the filing of . a plat intended to replat the above-described property; and WHEREAS, the City Council has, on examination of the facts and records of the City herein, determined that the Developers have performed none of the promised actions at any time in the ensuing twelve or more years since the execution of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the ensuing period has been more than sufficient time for the promised actions by the Developers to have been performed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Fridley finds and declares the aforesaid Developers and any of their heirs and assigns, as indicated in the Agreement, to be in breach of the Agreement. ��L� Page 2- Resolution No. - 1997 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City staff shall be directed to take such steps as may be necessary to rescind any Council action done in reliance on the agreement, including, but not limited to, beginning the necessary rezoning of the above-described parcel to what it had been prior to its rezoning to R-3; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Fridley is no longer obligated to perform any additional duties that might have otherwise have been required in the event of timely compliance by the Developers to the terms of the Agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Fridley rescinds its approval of the proposed plat for the parcel that had previously been approved by the City in its action on September 24, 1984, which approved proposed plat was never filed and put on record with Anoka County. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1997. ATTEST: NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK ��I;? DATE: June 18, 1997 MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO: Wiliiam Burns, City Manager �� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Julie Jones, Planning Assistant/Recycling Coordinator SUBJECT: 1997 Anoka Countv Residential Recvclinq Aqreement We have just received three copies of the 1997 Agreement for Residential Recycling Program from Anoka County. In order for the City of Fridley to receive 1997 SCORE funds, this agreement needs to be executed by July 20, 1997, the deadline for report forms on January through June recycling expenses. The Agreement needs to be executed by the Mayor and the City Clerk. The City Attorney approval is optionaL The City of F�idley has been allocated $76,506.13 in SCORE funds for 1997. This is $1,699.23 less than the 1996 allocation. This is due to the per household allocation being reduced from $6.02 to $5.94 per household and the reduced reallocation amount compared to last year. Although Anoka County received over $7,000 more SCORE funding (which is generated from the 6.5% sale tax on garbage bitls) from the State this year, the number of households in the county are growing. This means that cities, like Fridley, which ace not rapidly growing, will continue to receive less SCORE funding under the County's allocation formula. This allocation formula works as follows: Base amount +$5.94/household + 9996 Rea//ocation = Eligibi/ity Amount For Fridley, in 1997, our eligibility amount is as follows: $10,000 + $65,672.64 + 833.49 = $76,506.13 This is slightly higher than our estimate put in the 1998 budget proposal. M-97-263 97 County Agmrt Memo 5.01 Anoka County Cuntract tk9002i9-7 AGREEMENT FOR RESIDEN"f[AL RLCYCL[NG PNOGEZAM THIS AGREEI�NT made and entered into on the 27rd day of May, 1997, notwithstanding the date of the signatures of the parties, between the COliNTY OF ANOKA, Sta[e of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as thc "COUNTY", and the CITY OF FRIDLEY, hcreinaftcrrcferred to as the "MUNIC[PALITY". W [1'NESSETH: WHEREAS, Anoka County has received $770,048 in funding from the State of Minnesota pursuant to Minn. Stat. � I 15A.557 (hereinafter "SCORE funds")_ and WEIEREAS, the County wishes to assist the Municipality in meetin� recyclin�� oals established by the Anoka County Board of Commissioners by providing said SCORE funds to cities and townships in the County for solid waste recycling programs. NOW, THEREFORI;, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutua(ly agree to the following tecros and conditions: PURPOSE. The purpose of this Agreement is to'provide for cooperation between the County and the Municipalily to implement solid waste recyclin, pro�rams in the Municipality. ?• TERM. "I'he term of this Agreement is from January ;, 199 i throuQh December 31, 1997, unles� earlier ternunated as provided herein. `" 3• PROGRAM. The Municipality shall develop and implement a residential so(id waste recycling program adequate to meet the Municipality's annual recycling goal of 2,468 tons as established by the County. "Recycling" means the process of collecting and prepacing recyclable materials and reusing the materials in their original form or using them in manufacturing processes that do not cause the destruction of recyclable materials in a manner that precludes further use. "Re�yclabie materials" means materials thaf are separated from mixed municipal solid waste for the purpose of recyc(ing, including paper, glass, plastics, metals, fluorescent lamps, and vehicle batteries. Refuse derived fuel or other material that is" destroyed by incineration is not a recyclable material. "Problem material" shall have the meaning set forth in Minn. Stat. § 115A.03, subdivision 24a. °Yard waste" shall have the meaning set forth in Minn. Stat. § 115A.93 L �• REPORTING. The Municipality shall submit the following reports semiannually ta the Co�nty no later than Ju[y 20, 1997 and January 20, 1998: A. An accounting of the amount of waste which has been recycled as a result of the Municipality's activities and the efforts of other community programs, redemption centers and drop-off ccnters. For recycling programs, the Municipality shall certify the number of tons of each recyclable material which has been collf:cted and the nwnber of tons of each recyclable material which has been marketed_ For recycling programs run by other persons or entities, the Municipality shall also provide documentation on forms provided by the County shawing the tons of materials that were recycled by the Municipality's residents throu�i� these other pro�rams. The Municipali[y shall kcep de�ailed records documenting the disposition of all recyclable matenals col(ected ��in-suant to this abrcement. The Munici��ality shall also report t�ic nurnl�er of cut�ic yards or tons of y�ird wastc collected for com��osiin�� r landsJ�reading. Loge[h�r �vith a descri��tion ol� [I�e � 5.02 methodology used for calculations. Any other �nateri<tl removed from the Lti:�cte stream by the Municipality, i.e. tires and used oil, shall also be reported separatelJ�. B. Information regarding any revenue received from sources other than ttx County foc the Municipality's recycfing programs. C. Copies of a(I promotional maCenals that have been �repared by the ��Iuni� ipali:�- durir�g the term of this Agreement to promote its recycling programs. T�he Municipa(ity agrees to furnish the County with additiona( reports in form and at frequencies requested by the County for financial evaluation, program management purposes. ar►d reporting to the State of Minnesota. �. I3ILLING AND PAYMENT PROCEDURE'. The Municipality shall �ubmit itemized invoices senuannually to the County for abatement activities no later than July 20, 1997 and January 20, 1998. Costs not billed by January 20, 1998 will not be eligible for funding. The in�oices sh311 be paid in accordance with standard County procedures, subject to the approval of the .�noka Coi nty Board of Com�nissioners. EL[GIBILITY FOR FUNDS. The Municipality is entitled to recei��z reimbur�ement for eligible expenses, less revenues or other reimbursement received, for eli�ible acti��iti:s �p to the project maximum as compute.d below, which sha(l nar e.xceed $76,506.13. The project maximum foreligible expenses sha(t be computed as follows. A. A base am�unt of $10,000.00 for recycling activities oniy; and B. $5.94 per household for recycling activities on(y. C. A supplemental grant of $833.49 (hereinafter referreci to as a"Supplemental Grant") for problem material management, solid waste recycling and yard waste abatement programs to be disbursed to the Municipality within thirty days oF execution of rhis Agreement. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the Municipalit}° shall be entitled to use said Supplemental Grant monies only for eligible expenses paid by the Municipality during the period January 1, 1997, through June 30, 1997, for problem material management, solid waste recycling and yard waste abatement programs. On or before July 20, 1997, the Municipality shall submit a report itemizing the expenditures of the Supplemental Grant monies on a report form provided by the County, together �vith receipts verifyin� said expenditures. Any Supplemental Grant monies not expended by the Municipaliry on or txfor June 30, 1997, shall be returned to the County. 7. RECORDS. The Municipality shall maintain financia( and other records and accour. � in accordance with requirements of the county and the State of Minnesota. The Municipaliry �ha!; maintain strict accountabi(ity of all funds and maintain records of all receipts and disbur�ements. Such records and accounts shall be maintained in a form which will permit the tracing of funds and nr�, �ram income to tinal expenditure. The Municipality shalt maintain records sufficient to reflect tha, a�( funds received under this Agree�nent were expended in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 1 1 �A.»7. sut*�. �. for residential solid waste recyclin� purposes. The Municipa(ity shall also maintain record� � r r�.� quantities of mate�ials recycled_ All records and accounts shall be_retained as provided b�� lati+�. �ut i�, no event for a p�riod of less than three years from the last receipi of payment from the Coun;� :.��rsu.tnt to this :�,rrcement. � 2 5.03 �+• AUU[T. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. � 16B.0G, Subd. 4, the Municipality shall allow thc County or othcr pertions or agencies authonred by the County, and the State of Minnesota, includin<T the Legis�ative Auditor or the State Auditor, acc:ess to the records of the Municipality at reasonable hours, including all books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of [he Municipality relevant to the subject matter of the Agroement, for purposes of audit. In addition, the County shall have access [o the project site(s), if any, at reasonable hours. � y• GEIVERAL PROVIS[ONS A. In perForming [he provisions of this Agreement, both parties agree to comply with all applicable federal, state or local laws, ordinances, rules, rewlations or standards esiablished by any a�ency or special governmenta( unit which are now or hereafter promulQated insofar as they relate to perfonnance of the provisions of this A;reement. In addition, the Municipality shall comply with a11 appticable requirements of the State of Minnesota for the use of SCORE funds provi�led to the Municipality by the County under this Agreemeni. B. No person shall illegally, on the;�-ounds of r-ace, creed, co(or, reli�ion, sex, marital status, public assistance status, sexual preference, handicap, a;e or national oritrin, be excluded from full employment rights in, participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to unlawful discrimination under any pro�ram, sen�ice or activity hereunder_ The Municipality agrees to take affinnative action so that applicants and emp(oyees are treated equally with. respect to the following: employment, upgradina, demotion, transfer, recniitment, layoff, terinination, selecUOn for training, rates of pay, and other forms of compensation. C. The Municipality shall be responsible for the perfonnance of all subcontracts and shall ensure that the subcontractors perfonn fully the terms of the subcontract. The Agreement between the Municipality and a subcontractor shall obligate the subcontractor ta comply fully with the terms of this Agreement. D- The Municipality agrees that the Municipality's employees and subcontractor's employees �vho provide services under this ag�ement and who fall within any job ciassification estab[ished and published by the Minnesota Department of Labor & Industry shall be paid, at a minimum, the prevailing wages rates as certified by said Department. E- It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral and written agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. F� Any amendments, alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of this A�reement shall be valid only when they have been reduced to wnting, duly signed by the parties. G. Contracts let and purchases made under this Agreenaent shall be ►nade by the Municipality in conformance with all laws, niles, and rebulations app(icable to Che Municipality. � f�- The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any para�raph; section, subdivision. sentence, ctause or phrase of this Agrecment is for any reason held� to be contrar�� to law,�sueh decision sh<tll not affect the remaining portion of this Abreement � No�hino in this Abreement shall be constiz�ed as•creatin� thc relation�hip of co�-partners, joi��it ven�urci-s, �r an association betwcen thc County and Municij�ality, nc>r shall th� ��lunicit�ality, its cn��ployccs, agents or rc��rescratativcs hc c<�nsidcred employ�c�, a��ents. <�r�rc�,rr.c nt<il-ivcs ��1 tl�c C<�unty f�<ir any ��ur��sc_ � 5.04 10. PUI3L[CAT[ON. The Municipality shall acknowledge the financial assistance of the County on all promotional materials, reports and publications relating to the activities funded un�er this Agreement, by including the following acknowledgement: "Funded by the Anoka County Board of Commissioners and State SCORE funds (Se(ect Committee on Recyc(ing and the Environment). 11. [NDEMNIFICATION. The County agrees to indemnify, defend, and hoid the Municipality harmless from all claims, demands, and causes of <iction of any kind or character, inctuding the cost of defense thereof, resulting from the acts or omissions of its public officials, officers, agents, empioyees, and contractors relating to activities perfonned by the County under this Agreement. The Municipality agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold the County harmless from all claims, demands, and causes of action of any kind or characr.er, including the �ost of defense thereof, resultinb from the acts or omissions of its public officials, officers, agents, employees, and contractors relatinQ ro activicies performed by the Municipality under this Agreement. � The provisions of this subdivision shall survive the ternunation or expiration of the tenn of this Agreement. 12. TERMINATION. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual written agreement of the parties or by either party, with or without cause, by giving not less than seven (7) days written notice, delivered by mail or in person to the other party, spec.ifying the date of termination.. If this A�reement is terminated, assets acquired in whole or in part wiih funds provided under this A�reement shalt be the property of the Municipality so long as said asser.s are usec� by the IVlunicipality for ihe puepose of a landfill abatement program approved by the County. 4 5.05 IN 4V[T�NESS WH[:REOr, ihe paitics hereunto set their hands as of the dates first wrilte�a above: COUNTY OF ANOKA : Dan Erhart, Chairman Anoka County Board of Commissioners Date: ATTEST: John "Jay" McLinden County Administrator Date: Approved as to form and legality: Assistant County Attorney _>" 5.06 CITY OF FRIDLEY By:_ Nam� Title: Date: Municipality's Clerk Approved as to form and legality: DATE: June 18, 1997 MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO: William Burns, City Manager �� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Julie Jones, Planning Assistant/Recycling Coordinator SUBJECT: Appointment of Brad Sielaff to CWP Advisory �ommittee In order to satisfy the requirements of the Springbrook Clean Water Partnership {CWP) grant, we need to create both an Advisory Committee and a Technical Committee. We are attempting to include at least finro representatives from each City that has storm water draining into Springbrook Nature Center on the Advisory Committee. There will also be other business representatives and volunteers with environmental interests on the Advisory Committee. The task of this committee will be to finalize the project work plan, oversee the data collection, coordinate pubic education, and draft the final report. The Technical Committee will function to provide technical expertise to the Advisory Committee. This committee will include representatives from tiie DNR, MPCA, SCWMO, Anoka County, and an environmental consultant. - Staff recommends that the Fridley representatives to the Advisory Committee be Siah St. Clair, Springbrook Naturalist, and Brad Sielaff, Chair of the Environmental Quality and Energy Commission. Since Mr. Sielaff's position is one appointed by the City Council, we feel it is appropriate for the Council to accept his offer to serve on this committee and formally appoint him for the task. No other member of the EQE Commission has volunteered to serve on the CWP committees. For your inforrnation, there is copy of the project's timeline on the reverse of this memo. M-97-288 Filename: CWP Sielaff Appt 6.� � Sprinqbrook CWP Proiect Timeline Activitv Form Advisory and Technical Committees Develop Work Plan First Technical Committee meeting First Advisory Committee meeting Final draft of Work Plan to MPCA Install monitoring equipment Comprehensive monitoring Analyze data Collect any additional data necessary Develop water quality goals Develop suggested Implementation Plan Finalize Implementation Plan Complete project, bring results and recommendations to individual cities SCWMO considers Phase II application 6.�2 Date June 1997 July 1997 July 1997 August 1997 September 1997 October 1997 Fatl 1997 through fall 1998 Winter 1998 Spring/Summer 1999 Fall 1999 Winter 1999-2000 Spring 2000 Summer 2000 Fall 2000 CITY OF FRIDLEY M E M O R A N D O M TO: WILLIAM W. BURN3, CITY MANAGER � � FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR WILLIAM A. CHAMPA, CITY CLERR SUBJECT: E3TABLISH A PIIBLIC HEARING FOR ORIENTAL HOUSE FOR A BEER LICENSE DATE: JUNE 19, 1997 Oriental House has new owners and has applied for a Beer License. Pursuant to Chapter 602.05 of the Fridley City Code, we are required to hold a public hearing before issuing this license. As a result, we would like to establish a public hearing for Oriental House on July 14, 1997. The Police Department has performed the required background investigation on Oriental House and Public Safety Director Sallman has not found any reason to deny this request. 7.01 FINANCE DEPARTMENT CITY OF FRIDLEY TO: MEMORANDUM � �, � . WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER � �� RICHARD D. PRIBYL FINANCE DIRECTOR FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUSAN LEMIUEX, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR WALTER COLE, ACCOUNTING DATA /PROCESSINC CLERK SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE SPLITTING OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR LOTS 1& 2, BLOCK 1 OSBORNE COMMERCE CENTER DATE: JUNE 19, 1997 Attached you will find the resolution authorizing and directing the splitting- combination of special assessments. This property is generally located at 193-223 Osborne Road NE which is owned by Steiner Development. The final plat, P.S. # 97-01 was approved with resolution number 34-1997 on Apri128, 1997 to create a new parcel to accommodate an office/warehouse building. Each new parcel has three projects outstanding with a total balance of $ 46,686.40 owing. RDP/whc Attachment 8.01 RESOLUTIOIV NO. - 1997 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE SPLITTING/COMBINATION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON : LOT S 1& 2, BLOCK 1 OSBORNE COMMERCE CENTER WHEREAS, certain special assessments have been levied with respect to certa.in land and said land has subsequently been subdivided. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: That the assessments levied against the following described parcels, to wit: Lots 1& 2, Block 1, Osborne Commerce Center may and shali be apportioned and divided and replatted as follows: Originai Parcels Assessments Original Amounts 11-30-24-22-0001 6000-1989-00 $ 3,907.96 6000-1989-05 4,761.00 6000-1988-04 4,178.10 10-30-24-11-0025 6000-1989-00 $ 11,723.73 6000-1989-05 14,364.17 6000-1988-04 3,023.59 10-30-24-1_1-0002 6040-1988-04 $ 4,727.85 Total Assessments $ 46,686.40 New Parcels Assessments New Amounts 10-30-24-22-0029 6000-1989-00 $ 3,907_96 6000-1989-05 4,761.00 6000-1988-04 4,178.10 10-30-24-11-0031 6000-1989-00 $ 10;064.83 6000-1989-05 12,331.64 6000-1988-04 2,595.76 10-30-24-11-0030 6000-1989-00 $ 1,658.90 6000-1989-OS 2,032.53 6000-1988-04 5,155.68 Total Assessments $ 46,686.40 - PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1997 l�1ANCY J. JORGENSON-MAYOR ATTESST: WILLIAM M. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK 8.02 2.44 X$ \ \ � � � % � � �P '^ G �i z -', � s '� . '� � J � ' � ,T. i BITUI�NOUS ' i , � a6.. � � 6 ` � �i � CATCH B0.5W . /� � � j' , . . . CP D � � •� ` i •� 1 � \ � cJ` � � y s�.c L '1 � � � � 8£3.77 / y .863J9 862.33� � � — \ � a ., � \ \ �o � \ y X 863.25 � �` p Q '�� ) ' �p � r� , � O= tJ' � ,� � X 862. X 862.6 �� i \ � / � �- � �`.1' / ' . 62. 6 �" \ �� i �/ 61_U4 — — — — — — PROPOSED / � � \ o�a � O s� AGCESS ^e R � J26 � � l,�.��r N 62. ' �o . EISEMENT �p / 3 � `n � % l \,�' ,tf ,. �. o`�'y ��. j� I �� G, �, �r � I � ot ��. \ � 'c' Q-. ,� �_� a;�� a,�� o � ��ee X 861. ; I ; I � \ � � �`� i � `-r � PROPG�t� � e J (x e° �o �; C! � a.35 LOTLWE �l� / �`r X 859.65 � 0 9 . k ! ;, ,• �% '�"•!� . ct, �., • j � I' � ' �' SF`i ¢' , ' E C 7 6 ' CF ,', -=` I � � 1 ZCC � i,^' FiQ � M v � �� I tl' �� CG\ BLDG G �. � �r � i : � � � 1 . � � � � ' 7- � . � . (. �, f p �` � CON�rtEi � CU�B `- CONCF � ; ) � � � �Q �� Bi7u�iNoLS ��° ! � 1 � � � � .�e - .� �� J;, � /�O+ x - J ;�� ! 1tT� ;. �: \ � � -pN �sEM�R ,� `ob�6 � � O . � . 8ba.« . /�' J � 11 ' � �4 Y % `r�1 � -� C V i � l r � c �, � � ,1 NN (p � /o e� � �° oe : �l�� (--^ ' 1 � � _. .3 .� 1 Oo / � / � '\(r'ti F\I �-; `•�l ��\\J l� i � 1��' tr�'�p� W /��• Q/ o c. � F 1 C, ��` l '' ' .•' � 'o � X � 5/ e/ I 86 .8 � �, / Q i \� . / / � •, ,\�� fi ; �I I �i ��1. 86s.5� � / . / �� ; • � x s �`' ; \ � 1 � ; i 1 j - � �' ` � � "3 � � i 1 � � 66°4�2 / � Q� / f g, i. � � � � i• ! � \y �..�.` GO�G � , d I �_ �, � - � ; . `� i ,�- . 1. � — � / � h`� �, '� y � / �i � � 1, tic � � l r j�U ,`7 X 800.95 / e3 �p� / _;` � ti:� \ � . i �. r ,' \ j , ;� , � �\ . / / //e61?` \ � / � / � ' - 86 .� � %- - � / � /,/ � /� ' � / � . �\ �\\ ' � / 6� "I / � Y� � / � 86 .3�i , �.� \� '� / � / / �j / / / ' ' � 1 �� C�� (�� j / ac..� �� / � / /�' �O ■sl I .\ �/ ti � �l � / / �/ '4. \ ,- �' /t� 0.Cr�� • 862 / / . / � / . �, �� , , � ,� a,.e \ / � � / . /"� � �,c� � � / 1 / / i /�`� \ (,° �'.\. � '\.� / / � i . o�l h�' / � � � ., r' �, 1 � ��#t;2.8a o`µ� �� \ i z` `r � / � c� '�� ` -�P! �� '� P�.Afi ��EA 0 �e-t��OG \ "� / ,. \ � " ' . �, 85,� 7 � / I / . � � �.�� 1 � � �S �� . 3� � , /1 � � , � i � -- --. � .: /O, T.30, R.24 OF FR/OL EY � EAST RANCff ' 6 � � ESTAT S EAST RANCN � J I 22 FOURT ADD. �S iATES U U L I NE �,- ;/ FIRST ADD. � y OmvE�P � _ . "' ' ' _ ' l `---Tft�L //_ . ' A .�. .. ' ` ` - .. ':'_'�[:�7�N--AVf-1��--.. r�. .r . `' �° � — ..- � �� _ �� .�.. _ p . `� � YL-,"+'j' ' ' .,. T C �1'� -�= '.'�m'A = � � � " ST. RANCH= ..._ .�r",�... '" I s o N ��; `J' 7= � F' i E� � • � ` � ,B R .��,'.�' �� ,�� .\ �� ° \ 1 ` �- ° ' l�"ES TES �� ....� __ � r° • � . 2_ / �-� y�- ,:F� r, � ' �.; � �` . r�.. - : � '�"''1 ` � t: �-° . �–' ` `_ =�, � r, � ��t \` TH/R ADD. s�: z ri�°: _b �,: � ; _ — . �-•. . � � � •'� `� ,``, . �i �� s� �- n,/ ... .... ... �!�'��., ;� � - i � -= _-' �v f, � ,. v-• � ` • �.. � ��v�r � _ ` \ (e) i = _ t � -_:i � -1 - � I' _ �F,� � rl � �` '!d - _ � �� _ - °�r•?a T -_ ; r� ;�'1 '� '. ;� t 7 `, � r` ,� �' lt � w !�� f �J�---� 7E _v J� �:,,, �.� \ \ S ^ �9 i �/ :_� � :v • � � -� � ('. � 8 \ .� `� � Na s �� ✓ lf}s � �, ) `°1 <�. `� � . �� ' / � � ' � / � � � �`�� • � ' �W f ff� l��rs 9 . \ \ � `i. _ , :.� : �i, . _ '��_ A � � � vt �pN j- ; ze ;F- i ._• • �. ror� nW � 8�� ..�'S .� : : 2- - — s�- — � � ' � � 1 SU � ;,t? _ . ' � �� r� �g� �c'' � ", I I rbI �h / ' � %., ( i ° 4i � z a� �� \Y\ {%� " � : �_ � I ,7,(, r.�� Y h - � ' �t_.� _ y i �R � a<< � .f' /,q /�� . '' . a �� .. _ 2 •"- . �i ! �. � '+ C• i ' �ti' uu� I 'ES�� {{�'f+ , ;: . l••J \ t gF.� Otd � �az-� � Gi � �) S ! � . l�'.� rilF' � _ �'tr'�p � � ,�r��a �_ , 13 � \. b R , 's' � � "•, � (�) r � �, :� (� I �� za = � " � � t+vl'�' i ,,�p,�( .�= � . i : =•. ` r 14 � �,� '; : �'-' ; 2C 3 l+J �." 3 Z � c '. � ' 6. �s j K�� H�l'� a� Q ° 5 ♦ ' ... ,,_i �� . K ) 2 1 ' iiA�� , •+� 4� �� t � ..\ �� - F i z /»� (Il i � 2�. f i71 �, �� .� i� _�,, �T� C F�• -� y ,` __- 'I _____�__+ _ _IJ (, _ t W __ _ iS " ��+�+� _^f l J , .� ` .. 1 `�, . � i � 'J� �,.� '� .�� l � ! � � - � P � �� .!'J` �.�' n �. ` ti q1-. " � - . -5 j � l f '. �/ ' � 1' ,i �, �"': - _ � l7 1 �� j - i�C('• '`L' � �y+��. 1 % ��\ �1 Q II Q � `1�y h� . ' �.i . 1 , ,� �� '. �'' r 1r` ' . '9 (` ;. �3i' 0' �' � 1 �\: � � � = j� u � t � _ � � ; �1 � I (tfJ . * io i• W � �� 'Z i ! �� 1(� I � �2_ � `� F � i� � 1 1 1, (a � i K � i i A� �. �f€ i��' �' �� - Z�'r� k 1. �, � 1�', (� ' r:� ' w i i i' '° �. 2 � '� �. � � � ! �� 9. A . GE — _�yqy;;tys _ ' a ,p+�•{' 't 3 r �' � 1 �------' - --- ------ — , � } �` T4TH a- ,� J ' � • ' c' _ 1 i' 1 1 _ .� � iz C� 4aJ �., w ' � M h+' Lv� C"� ' � t .v • � i J Ck t LU Of 3_= e � e, '1r`: �� ,' ,� �., �y `� s �T i ,, " , S D ` :�; � W . ,J � J � . C'� � ` \ ,: ( �� ( .) Z • zZ �, ,�'�l �. i��r� + *L�.. iu, � � � 1 t Il S rv r"e .,a, }={ �Z � : k{' 1 � � E � 1 • , ` ! ,_ ,. �.� :rM 1 '� .I v m Gi'� \ �� 4 j� � �----..�`.-- zs ' y , ' �� 3 �: 1`,t''�1 1��' f„� �i . �� ji... �' __ __ `` � I 1 ' � n � �i� � ::7�j ' - � ' t ] i , }V� ' W � a� f `i � 1 � .� ' I ' ('~ . I' 1 'l ��11.' ��` '� /� � _ __ _ �F � I!�> y / – �J ,�� 7y KF� CREEK ' i' �•� , '�' �, c, W } ..:� - .l - 5 �� hV �1,��. � �, ;. `� . _.L - ' ' i �- J ? ,1 , 3 � f 3 2.��.�: � �l _ . � � j,l' C '� � N�/. (•) T �I . � . _ ^ ' ��. .'p• � � �� Q��' r '~ '� GIEN CREEK:RO ��y� - i --- T-" ----- � . / �� ' <; ,J• (� �� , } ' � ro) Ii � � '�.• " ? •,, �'�' r"nJ . i ." P. AT� - • � 1 � � 1� CO, ,•` ~ _ - `� r,. , •, ¢•� ,. - d / y, i„ � � s » . (-�' `' )" �'i_ P � T ,—� }1- � ,} N, . !I V J ,., �,Y ;e , r' `3` � - �, l�� 'a� ` I _ �� _G,N RE '� � i ., 1 . � ,, Y : � � .. i" _ �.' l "° ,�'� . . C � � �, =* r_. <�_- � ,; r; = __� — , ` „ � � . . . „ f" .._ ..... ! . _� _ k � _ , , A I aa . � u � � f � _—__.__._ . r . . ..,.. ... -:. . . _ s o" �% I <' �. ' � _ _ =f -7�3fi4' `�,�C✓ ,. N.E y ' . 1 _ ' ` � Yr_r_-. D / T l O � ` `�"ER . � - , , � � _---� �� "-�: ,� ` `sE�� „ ---� ANOKA COIMiY�NOKA�� COUNTT � . . � � �—� MIGMWAV R/W HIGHWAY R/ W � � � � � PL47 NO_ 42 PLA7 NO_ 2H � � 9 �41 23, l.� �I : 1 � FINANCE DEPA.RTMENT CITY OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: MEMORANDUM '� � WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER �� RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR RICHARD D. PRIBYL FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $3,910,000 FLOATING RATE DEMAND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS(RIVER ROAD INVESTORS PROJECT) SERIES 1997; APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A TRUST INDENTURE, A LOAN AGREEMENT, AND A BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND VARIOUS OTHER DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THIS FINANCING. DATE: June 18,1997 Attached you will find a resolution that has been provided by Sherrill Oman from the firm of Doherty Rumble & Butler. She is representing Harry Yaffe in his request to reissue conduit financing for the project known as"River Road Investors ProjecY'. Jim O'Meara, City of Fridley's Bond Counsel, has reviewed the bond documents. The bonds need to be refunded because the prior letter of credit is ,expiring and needs to be reissued. The new bonds are being credit enhanced by a letter of credit being issued by First Bank National Association. The term of the new bonds will be a seven year issue and are expected to have an A-1 bond rating. As we have stated in the past, these types of bonds are a form of "conduit financing". This means that the full faith and credit of the City is not pledged, and the City is only acting as an administrative agent for the issuance of the bonds. RDP/rne Attachment 9.01 RESOLIITION NO. - 1997 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $3,910,000 FLOATING RATE DEMAND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS(RIVER ROAD INVESTORS PROJECT) SERIES 1997; APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A TRUST INDENTURE, A LOAN AGREEMENT, AND A BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND VARIOUS OTHER DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THIS FINANCING WHEREAS, on November 5, 1984, the City of Fridley, Minnesota (the °Issuer") adopted a resolution approving the issuance of its Floating Rate Demand Commercial Development Revenue Bonds (River Road Investors Project) Series 1984 (the "Prior Bonds"), pursuant to the Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota: Statutes, chapter 474, recodified as Minriesota Statutes, sections 469.152 to 469.169, as amended (the "Act") and loaned the proceeds to River Road Investors, a Minnesota general partnership, now known as River Road Investors, LLP, a Minnesota limited liability partnership (the "Company") to finance the acquisition, construction, and equipping of office/warehouse facilities located at 5155 and 5201 East River Road in the City of Fridley (the "Project"); and WHEREAS, the Prior Bonds were issued by the Issuer on November 20, 1984; WHEREAS, the Company has requested the Issuer to issue its Floating Rate Demand Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (River Road Investors Project), Series 1997, in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $3,910,000 (the "Bonds") on or about July 17, 1997, to provide for the funding of a loan (the "Loan") to the Company, the proceeds of which will be used for the purposes of refunding the Prior Bonds; and WHEREAS, the Loan will be made pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement dated as of July l, 1997 (the "Loan AgreemenY'), by and between the Issuer and the Company; and WHEREAS; First Bank National Association has agreed to facilitate the refinancing of the Project by providing credit enhancement and liquidity support for the Bonds pursuant to a Letter of Credit to be dated the date of issuance of the Bonds and delivered to Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association (the "Trustee"); and WHEREAS, the Bonds will be issued under a Trust Indenture dated as of July 1, 1997 (the "Indenture"), between the Issuer and the Trustee, and are to be secured by the Indenture, and a pledge and assignment of certain other revenues, all in accordance with the terms of the Indenture; and 9.02 WHEREAS, forms of the following documents relating to the Bonds have been submitted to the Issuer: a. the Loan Agreement; and b. the Indenture; and c. the Bond Purchase Agreement (the "Bond Purchase Agreement") by and between the Issuer, the Company and Dougherty Dawkins LLC (the "Underwriter"), providing for the purchase of the Bonds from the Issuer by the Underwriter and setting the terms and conditions of purchase. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. For the purpose of financing the cost of refunding the Prior Bonds, there is hereby authorized the issuance of $3,910,000 aggregate principal amount City of Fridley, Minnesota, Floating Rate bemand Commercial Development Revenue Refunding Bonds (River Road Investors Project), Series 1997, dated as of the date of issuance thereof (the "Bonds"). The Bonds shall be in such denominations, shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall mature, shall bear interest, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, shall be in such form and shall have such other details and provisions as are prescribed by the Indenture. Section 2. The Bonds shall be special obligations of the Issuer, payable solely from the revenues received by the Issuer from the Loan Agreement, in the manner provided in the Indenture, and the $onds shall not constitute or give rise to an indebtedness, general or moral obligation, charge, lien or encumbrance of the Iss.uer or with respect to its revenues, assets or taxing powers. The City Council of ` the Issuer hereby authorizes the Mayor and the City Manager, in their discretion and at such time, if any, as they may deem appropriate, to execute and to deliver the Indenture, the Loan Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement, and the Bonds. The Indenture, the Loan Agreement, and the Bond Purchase Agreement shall be substantially in the forms on file in the office of the City Manager with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as permitted or required or as the City Manager, in his discretion, shall determine, and the execution thereof by the City Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. No covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement herein contained or contained in the Indenture, the Loan Agreement, or the Bond Purchase Agreement shall be deemed to be a covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement of any member of the City Council or any officer, agent or employee of the Issuer in that person's individual capacity, and neither the City Council of the Issuer nor any officer executing the Bonds shall be liable personally on the Bonds or be subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof. 9.03 Section 3: The officers and employees of the Issuer are hereby authorized to do all acts and things and execute all documents and certificates required of them by or in connection with this resolution, the Indenture, the Loan Agreement, and the Bond Purchase Agreement for the full, punctual and complete performance of ali the terms, covenants and agreements contained in the Bonds, the Indenture, the Loan Agreement and this resolution. Section 4. T'he Issuer has not participated in the preparation of any preliminary official statement, final official statement or other offering material respecting the Bonds and assumes no responsibility for the sufficiency, accuracy, or completeness of any statement or information contained in any summary of the financing contemplated by the issuance of the Bonds. Section 5. The Trustee is hereby designated as the paying, authenticating and transfer agent and registrar for the Bonds. Section 6. This resolution shall be in full force and effect &om and after its passage. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 23RD OF JUNE, 1997. ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK 9.04 NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR � L CfiY OF FRIOLEY MEMORANDUM William C. Hunt Assistant to the City Manager Memo to: William W. Burns, City Manager '�� From: Brian D. Strand, Video Specialistt�� William C. Hunt, Assistant to the City Manager � �. Subject: Updating System Documentation Date: June 1$, 1997 The blue prints for the audio and video equipment and wiring in the Council Chambers and the Control Room are over eight. years old and do not reflect many changes that have occurred since then. We feel this is the right time to have the equipment drawings updated and redrawn. The new drawings would accurately number and trace all existing wiring. Accurate drawings help in the installation of new or replacement equipment. We have researched the cost of redrawing the system. We requested proposals from three companies with two companies responding. AVTS proposal is for $5,850, and Electronic Interiors proposal is for $5,100. We have chosen to accept the proposal from Electronic Interiors (See attached.) for a not to exceed sum of $5,100. We recommend that the payment be made from the reserve in the CATV Ftiind . Please submit this proposal for the City Council's approval at the June 23, 1997 Council Meeting. WCH/jb Attachment 10.01 May 29, 1997 Mr. Brian Strand City of k'r�dley 643 i University Avenue NE Fridley, NJIN 55432 12.�: Proposal �or Updating Sy9tem Documeatation for Council Chambers�echnology Dear Bclan_ The cur�ent documeotation that exists on yoc�r system is eight years old. Many changes W lhe syscem have been made in that time. Your existing documentation does not reflect these changes. The City would be well served to update the documentation now. The system is still operating e�ficiently after this period of time buc is due to start experieaoing failure at various levels. Updated documentation will gready assist in proper at�d expedient servicing of this system. Without updaled documentation, it could prove to be a time consuming and costly procedure to traok the various systems or parts responsible for fa�itu�e within your system. U�ciating of you� documentation at this point will prove to be cost-e�fective in the long run. A desigier from our firm wou�d need at least tbxe�e days (at the City) working with copies of th� cucrent drawings to trace and confirm atl present connections/equipment iaterfaees. After this is done, fouz oc five drawings would be produced a�id placed on CAD to pxecisely detail the ourrent wiring and systetns set up. These drawir�gs would include: • Audio SysEem . Video System • Cont�•o1 System � Rack Detai l The associated fees including all expettses (printang, tnileage, ete) would be a lump sum of $5,100. ��ease let me know if you would like to proceed with this pcoject. We woald weicome the opportunity to assist you. Sincerely, � � Kate O'Reilly, �rinci .�..- Electronic Tnteriors, Inc. CONSULTANTS AND DESIGNERS �uoa E�EC1�R0�11C . . VmEO •INFORM41tUN S�$1EMS �ND ' �ISSOCkTEO Tf<FINOIAG � /� . �O MACKUBIN STREET. SNf� PAUL MINNESOTA 55102 (6�2�292-1035 (612�292-1063 Fa�c 10.02 r � CfTY OF FRIDLEY GAS SERVICES Dependable Indoor Air Quality Inc 2619 Coon Rapids Bivd NW Coon Rapids MN 55433 Erv Smith Service America 1225 Truax Blvd Eau Glaire MN 54703 LICENSES JUNE 23, 1997 James Holt Noel Smith GENERAL CONTRACTOR - COMMERCIAL ALS Properties 5501 Lakeland Ave N Crystal Mn 55429 Mike Schrader Donnelly & Peterson Inc 12351 Cloud Dr Blaine MN 55449 Ken's Roofing Company 3600 Minnehaha Ave Minneapolis MN 55406 M & R Carpentry 1805 Ogden Ave Superior WI 54880 Weikle Earl & Sons 2514 24 Ave S Minneapolis MN 55406 Brian Peterson Phyllis Green Michael Schmidt Willard Weikle GENERAL CONTRACTOR - RESIDENTIAL BIR Construction (5145) PO Box 5036 Burnsville MN 55337 Scott Rajavuori Donnelly Windows Inc (20092971) 2519E25St Minneapolis MN 55406 Thomas Donnelly 12.02 RON JULKOWSKI Building Official Same RON JULKOWSKI Building Official Same Same Same. Same STATE OF MINN Same Gunderson Kent Construction (5764) 104 Geneva Blvd Burnsville MN 55306 Kent Gunderson Kitchen & Baths by Beeson & Horner (7642) 4051 Hwy 7 St Louis Park MN 55416' Pat Horner Northern Crest Inc (20098415) 8245 Polk St NE Spring Lake Park MN 55432 Patio Enclosures Inc (1676) 2123 Old Hwy 8 New Brighton MN 55112 Reveal Remodeling (7846) 13243 Jay St NW Coon Rapids MN 55448 Quality Services Inc (QSI) 20060493 PO Box 491 16 Blaine MN 55449 � Viking Home Improvement Co (4772) 4832 2 1/2 St NE Minneapolis MN 55421 � HEATING Dependable Indoor Air Quality Inc 2619 Coon Rapids Blvd Coon Rapids MN 55433 Erv Smith Service America 1225 Truax Blvd Eau Claire Wi 54703 Bill Olson f:FTil:�tiF� Ken Melser I��iFTl7►�iC�� •ii�F.Ti Margaret Merrell James Holt Noel Smith ROOFING Interstate Roofing & Waterproofing Inc N5544 Commerce Rd Onalaska WI 54650-9233 Nancy Schiffer 12.03 Same Same Same Same Same Same Same RON JULKOWSKI Building Official Same RON JULKOWSKi Building Official � � CfTY OF FRIDLEY Insituform Centrai, Inc. 17988 Edison Avenue Chesterfield, MO 63005 ESTIMATES JUNE 23,1997 Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair Project No. 304 FINAL ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �. . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 91,445.40 Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. 13925 Northdale Blvd. Rogers, MN 55374 1996 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1996 - 1& 2 FINAL ESTIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 11,628.86 Hardrives, Inc. 14475 Quiram Drive Rogers, MN 55374� Central Avenue Bikeway/Walkway Project No. ST. 1994 - 9 Estimate No. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 15,746.25 Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered 301 Fridley Plaza Office Building 6401 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Services Rendered as City Prosecuting Attorney for the Month of April, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 15,533.00 13.01 CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR,TMENT ENGINEERiNG DIVISION 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 June 23, 1997 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Fridley c/o William W. Burns, City Manager 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Council Members: CERTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER We hereby submit the Final Estimate for Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair Project No. 304, for Insituform Central, Inc., 17988 Edison Ave, Chesterfield, MO 63005. We have viewed the work under contract for the construction �of Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair Project No. 304 and find that the same is substantially complete in accordance with the contract documents. I recommend that final payment be made upon acceptance of the work by your Honorable Body and that the one year contractuaT maintenance bond commence on June 20, 1997. Respectfully submitted, � ( /� .� ,, � ohn G. Fldra Director of Public Works JT:cz Prepared by: `— �-, .,�s,� �-,,� �...--- . , �� . ,- , Checked by: --- _=—, °-y �------ 13.02 June 23, 1997 To: Public Works Director City of Fridley REPORT ON FINAL INSPECTION FOR CITY OF FRIDLEY SAl�IITARY & STORM SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 304 We, the undersigned, have inspected the above-mentioned project and find that the work required by the contract is substantially complete in conformity with the plans and specifications of the project. All deficiencies have been corrected by the contractor. Also, the work for which the City feels the contractor should receive a reduced price has been agreed upon by the contractor. So, therefore, we recommend to you that the City approve the attached FINAL ESTIMATE for the contractor and the one-year maintenance bond, starting from the day of the final inspection that being June 20, 1997. `_ C�1 ti �'12-C'�-�,. Jon ompson, Constructio Inspector ;�i� �, - � ,,-, _> ;�� ,, � �/ � , i'�cf�zr�_�_,' c.;i,��c /��c_.;. ��,-J� Contr�ctor Representative, (Title) ' 13.03 June 23, 1997 City of Fridley SANITARY AND STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 304 �ERTIFICATE OF ONTRACTOR This is to certify that items of the work shown in the statement of work certified herein have been actually furnished and done for.the above-mentioned projects in accordance with the plans and specifications heretofore approved. The final contract cost is $160,556.00 and the final payment of $91,445.40 for the improvemerit project would cover in full, the contractor's claims against the City for all labor, materials and other work down by the contractor under this project. I declare under the penalties of perjury that this statement is just and correct. 13.04 � June 23, 1997 City of Fridley SANITARY AND STORM SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 304 PREVAILING WA E VERIFICATION This is to certify that Insituform Central,. Inc. has abided by the Prevailing Wage Provisions as specified by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry for Anoka County. I declare under the penalties of perjury that this statement is just and correct. Insituform Central, Inc. 13.05 fROM: City of Fridley Engineering Division TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Fridley 6431 University Ave, NE Fridley, MN 55432 Dated: June 23, 7997 : `=::n:`::s;: �:�:::�. t�: ``:` `'`:::' :::::::::::::::s;::::::: tt� �. I .. ...:. � ...........:. .:::::.::.::::::::::.: . tem ..........................:. 7th Street sanitary sewer lining 15" CMF 57th Place sanitary sewer lining 10 in. "VCP and CMP Mobilization Reopen sanitary service connecton on 15 in. line Reopen sanitary service connection on 10 in. line ' Van Buren lining 36 in. storm sewer .'an Buren lining 30 in. Srorm Sewer SUBTOTAL TOTAL CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA 55432 Estimate No. 2 FINAL Period Ending: June 20, 1997 FOR: Insituform Ceniral, Inc. • 17988 Edison Ave Chesterfield MO 63005 SANITARY AND STORM SEWER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 304 Job Code: 602-6000-415-4530-6007 STATEMENT OF WORK - - :d::pe;�rnv�{ni;:;� :::::::::::::t:�T�1:�::::;:::;; :;:;[::�:.'s:';i::::;:;::: :::::�:�:�`::::::::::::::::::::::�:� �} ::�' ''i:•::::::::':::.�::::::':�':':' ::::::::::::: ':':':':::::::::::::::-::::::':':'�': . . . . . . . . . . .. ...'...'.'.'.'.'...''..:.:.: . . '�'n':�':}:::� :::::: :::::::::::::.: :::.:::::.'::�;�::.:_.•.'''' '-':::::'''':�'.::::::::- ::::_:_:::: �IOLQIi'- • ::::::.:::.:::::.:::::: � '.............•'' :.:.:.' ........... . . .. ... . ......... . .....�� ' :.:.:.:.: :.:.:.:.. ............:.::.:.:................. rt.... ..... i ......:..:.:.:.:.:..... ::::::::::.: .:.:.::::::::::::.:.:.:.:..:.:.:.:.:.:.: . .. ....:.:.:.: .......... . . . . .......... ..... . . . . .............. . . . . °�h. �.... . . . . . . . ...Ttn� . . . . ... ..... . . . . . ...-...-.. . . . . . . . . . ...- . . . : -: -:.::�'o�at -:. �: �: �: •: '� t'�` :;::: :: : =��'::� :::::�;�;`'��::�'�`;::::;::: :::'��::=:::::s::::;:': ::::::::' ::::::::::::::::��::�:: :::::::::::::::::::::'�::: '::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::<.:� un. �t . . ..-U�it... ....-...-Pnce..:.:-:.. :::�sta�ai�e::: ::::::::�st�cmarte:::::::: ::::=:::Tatal ::::::: :::::::::€:Ai�iau�i�::::�:�: 1,098 LF 51.00 - 0.00 1,098.00 55,998.00 315 LF 40.00 - 0.00 315:00 12,600.00 i LS 2,000.00 0.50 1,060.00 1.00 2,000.00 1 Each 450.00 - 0.00 2.00 900.00 8 Each 250.00 - 0.00 9.00 2,25Q.00 336 LF 138.00 336.00 46,368.00 336.00 46,368.00 337 LF 12�.00 337.00 40,440.00 337.00 40,440:00 � 13.06 587,808.00 S 160,556.00 No. 2 MMARY riginal Contract Amount ontract additions: ontract deductions: evised contract amount alue Completed To Date mount Retained (0%) ess Amount Paid Previously OUNT DUE THIS ESTIMATE �ERTIFICATE OF THE CONTRACTOR S 159,856.00 159,856.00 160,556.00 0.00 69,110.60 591,445.40 hereby certify that the work performed and the materials supplied to date under the terms of the contract r this project, and all authorized changes thereto, have an actual value under the contract of the amounts own on this/�estimate (and the final quantities on the final estimate are correctl, and that this estimate is just d co�recr/�nd no pa�t of th/el'Amount ue This Estimate" has been received. .:. � �'' / ;, r� �� .f' / v a, �►-�� ;�`�-c ; . ; ��r/��,i�� .a � � ;/�: Go t�actor's Authorized Repr�sej�tative (Title) —T / �.� ERTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER ereby certify that I have prepared or examined this estimate, and that the contractor is entitled to payment this estimate under the contract for reference project. 'Y OF FRIDLEY, INSPECTOR *-i _ / ��' _ :cked By -.._�---,� 13.07 Date to /.� % Respeotfull ubr�tted, � .' r John G. Flora, P.E. Public Works Director s Page 2 En9ineer�nc, Sewer Water City of Fridley �l � TO: John G. F1ora�Public Works Director PW97-168 FROM: �n Haukaas, Assistant Public Woxks Director �;��Jon Thompson, Estimator/Construction Inspector T°_. DATE: June 18, 1997 SUBJECT: Final Cost of Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repair Project No. 304 The Sanitary and Storm Sewer Repau Project No. 304 is now complete. The total contract cost is $160,�56. The original contract amount was $159,856. The $700 increase in the contract cost was due to two additional existing sanitary house services that did not show up on the previous TV reports. When the liner installation was completed, 11 rather than nine house services had to be cut out with the robotic cutter. The total overrun is less than 0.5 of 1%. JT:cz 13.08 CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR,TMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION 6431 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, Minnesota 55432 June 23, 1997 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Fridley c/o William W. Burns, City Manager 6431 Univ�rsity Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Council Members: CERTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER We hereby submit the Final Estimate for 1996 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1996 - 1&2, for Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc., 13925 Northdale Blvd, Rogers, MN 55374. We have viewed the wark under contract for the construction of 1996 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 1996 - 1&2 and find that the same is substantially complete in accordance with the contract documents. I recommend that final payment be made upon acceptance of the work by your Honorable Body and that the one year contractual maintenance bond commence on June 18, 1997. Respectfully submitted, � John G. Flora Director of Public Works JT:cz Prepared by: � - - � �— _ , Checked by: --- __ -��-- �-"L---- 13.09 June 23, 1997 City of Fridley 1996 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1996 - i&2 PREVAILING WAGE VERIFICATION This -is to certify that Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. has abided by the Prevailing Wage Provisions as specified by the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry for Anoka County. I declare under the penalties of perjury that this statement is just and correct. Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. t _ Dan Thomas, Vice President 13.i0 June 23, 1997 City of Fridley 1996 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1996 - 1&2 CERTIFICATE OF CONTRACTOR This is to certify that items of the work shown in the statement of work certified herein have been actually furnished and done for the above-mentioned projects in accordance with the plans and specifications heretofore approved. The final contiract cost is $581,442.83 and the final payment of $11,628.86 for the impravement project would cover in full, the contractor's claims against the City for all labor, materials and other work down by the contractor under this project. I declare under the penalties of perjury that this statement is: just and correct. Thomas & So�s Construction, Inc. /� ��U ` Dan Thomas, Vice President 13.11 June 23, 1997 To: Public Works Director City of Fridley REPORT ON FINAL IN PE TION FOR �ITY OF FRIDLEY 1996 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO T 1996 1&2 We, the undersigned, have inspected the above-mentioned project and find tha� the work required by the contract is substantially complete in conformity with the plans and specifications of the project. All deficiencies have b.een corrected by the contractor. Also, the work for which the City feels the contractor should receive a reduced price has been agreed upon by the contractor. So, therefore, we recommend to you that the City approve the attached FINAL ESTIMATE for the contractor and the one-year maintenance bond, starting from the day of the final inspection that being June 18, 1997 � ` � `L'71 �-�'�t �/� J on Thompson, Con ruction Inspector �� -/. � Contrac or Representative, (Title) 13.12 CITY OF FAIDLEY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT G431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE N.E. FRIDLEY, MINN�SOTA 55432 City of Fridley Engineering Division Estimate No. 10 FINAL Period Ending: June 18, 1997 ►: Honorable Mayor and City Council For: Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. City of Fridley 13925 Northdale Blvd 6431 University Ave, NE Rogers, MN 55374 Fridley, MN 55432 ted: June 23, 1997 1996 STREET iMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 1996 - 1&2 JOB CODE: 555-0000-415-4530-9601 ��: � fi��i?��e�et:�tai�`;:�::':;:;:::: emove concrete curb and gutter emove bituminous curb emove bituminous pavement emove concrete pavement emove catch basin awcut bituminous pavement �mmon excavation "opsoil Borrow ggregate base, Class 5(in place) ill bituminous surface ype 41A wearing course mixture (w/oil) ype 31 binder course mixture (w/oii) ype 31A leveling course mixture (w/oil) ituminous driveway esidential bituminous driveway ituminous mixture for tack coat 2-in. PVC pipe sewer 2-in. RCP sewer, Class III stall 12-in. PVC sanitary sewer through casing onnect sewer service 2-in. x 6-in. PVC wyes 4-in. jacked steel casing -in. open cut steel casing 1 1,300 6,075 100 460 10 6,250 5,000 390 2,337 350 2,400 825 100 1,025 1,500 2,200 590 100 184 8 8 180 180 STATEMENT OF WORK ::�:Aa LF SY SY Each SY SY Gal LF LF LF Each Each LF LF 19,000.00 2.00 0.40 5.00 7.00 100.00 1.30 5.00 10.00 15.00 10.00 26.25 27.85 38.50 17:50 17.50 1.75 34.00 26.00 Q.� 1 600.00 140.00 170.00 120.00 13.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0_00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1,265.00 6,191.00 11,480.00 321.30 10.00 6,411.00 2,601.50 908.00 I,096.10 297.00 2,335.90 1,809.00 88.00 1,024.30 102.00 1,225.00 623.00 48.00 150.00 9.00 9.00 300.00 19,000.00 2,530.00 2,476.40 57,400.00 2,249.10 1,000.00 8,334.30 13,007.50 9,080.00 16,441.50 2,970.00 6I,317.38 50,380.65 3,388.04 17,92525 1,785.00 2,143.75 21,182.00 1,248.00 1.50 5,400.00 1,260.00 51,000.00 0.00 1'HU�lAa o:. Jv.v, CUNS'PKUCl'IUN, INC. ESTI14iATE NO. 10 FINAI. =A i ;.::: Fst�n�At�a �: v►��t CoriLra�t:IEem AuanE�tir:::�:':tT:iir v ,... . n: 6•in. CI pipe sewer service 6-in. CI sewer risers Adjust valve box (gate) Relocate curb stop and box Salvage hydrant and valve assembly Water service connection 4-in. Gate valve and box 8-in. Gate valve and box Install hydrant and valve assembly 6-in. x 8-in. increaser 8-in. x 8-in. x 4-in. tee 8-in. x 8-in. x 6-in. tee 8-in. watermain-duct iron CL 52 8-in. DIP through casing CL 52 Construction manhole design 4007 Construct catch basin design C or G Furnish catch basin casting assembly Furnish manhole casting Adjust frame, ring and casting Connect manhole/catch basin Concrete walk (4-in.) Concrete curb and gutter - design B618 Residential concrete driveway (6-in.) 7-in. Concrete valley gutter Traffic control F&I sign panels type C Pavement message (RR Xing) poly preform Pavement message (pedestrian cross- ing) poly preform 44-in. solid line white -poly preformed '4-in. broken line yellow - poly preformed 24-in. wide stop line white - poly preformed 4-in. solid line yellow ? Lrosswalk marking - poly preformed :Loop detector (6 ft x 6 ft) jRelocate hand-holes (Sod, type lawn with 4-in. topsoil Clear and Grub Tree �8 inch Sleeve i8 inch 45 deg Bends Connect to Metro Sewer 150 LF 50 LF 21 Each 2 Each 2 Each 8 Each 1 Each 2 Each 2 Each 1 Each 1 Each 2 Each 635 LF 180 LF 42 LF 10 Each 10 Each i5 Each 24 Each 2 Each 100 SF 7,300 LF 1,000 SY 460 LF 1 LS 35 SF 2 Each 36.00 36.00 140.00 800.00 475:00 350.00 550.00 660.00 1, 800.00 175.00 220.00 250.00 34.00 0.01 225.00 800.00 330.00 275.00 170.00 200.00 4.00 6.50 28.00 ' 14.00 15,000.00 45.00 1,522.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0_00 0.00 0.00 0.00 PAG� 2 :: ?�otaa ;e: �`otul ::'.:A�nouni::.;.::; 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' 0.00 0.00 0.00 A.00 0.00 181.00 26.00 28.00 1.00 9.00 1.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 763.00 150.00 60.00 12.00 13.00 19.00 39.00 3.00 20.00 7,396.00 454.00 145.00 1.00 25.00 3.00 6,516.00 936.00 3,920.00 0.00 475.00 3,150.00 550.00 3,300.00 3,600.00 175.00 220.00 750.00 25,942.00 1.50 13,500.00 9,600.00 4,29Q.00 5,225.00 6,630.00 600.00 80.00 48,Q74.00 12,712.00 2,030.00 15,000.00 1,125.00 4,567.50 2 IEach I 556.50 I 0.00 1 O.00 I 2.00 I 1,113.00 1,200 500 1LF 149 700 LF 41 SF 3 Each 3 Each 5,800 SY 1 Each 1 Each 2 Each 1 LS 2.75 0.00 2.75 0.00 16.75 0.00 2.75 12.50 780.00 1,175.00 1.95 450.00 320.00 280.00 5,000.00 13.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1;030.00 2,832.50 0.00 160.00 440.00 0.00 98.00 1,641.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 641.00 90.00 5.00 7.00 7,325.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1,762.75 1,125.00 3,900.00 8,225.00 14,283.75 450.00 320.00 560.00 5,000.00 .�v.•�.a.. �.. .�....+i �va�Jll�l�✓11V1\� 1lVli. ESTI11fATE NO. 10 FINAL ' : :.:.: ; : Es�i ::::: �o � �tr�ct it ' :::::;:: :: ;: : : : '' � ::::::::::::::`::; ::. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .em . . . . ........:....._. . . . .i�v. lass 5 gradation lass 5 proctor lass 5 inplace density oncrete cylinder (set of 3) ituminous extraction and gradation ituminous air voids 5-in. RCP Sewer Class 3 e-locate hydrant " DIP Watermain ill existing bituminous rrigation system repair SUBTOTAL TOTAL riginal Contract Amount ontract additions: Change Order No. 1, 2, 3& 4 ontract deductions: evised contract amount alue Completed To Date mount Retained (0%) ess Amount Paid Previously MOUNT DUE TIiIS ESTIMATE 3 Each 2 Each 3 Each 3 Each 3 Each 2 Each 60 LF 2 Each 30 LF 1 LS 1 LS 150.00 150.00 150.00 150.00 50.00 125.00 31.50 2300.00 34.00 1,300.00 3,876.00 $527,183.64 54,353.50 581,537.14 581,442.83 0.00 569,813.97 $ 11,628.86 Gqt. : 1'btal is ..:.:.:. :. . .. �' t� is :..:::::: iatie::: ;:=:�stiriia:te:::: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I 0.00 0_00 0.00 0:00 $0.00 ERTIFICATE OF THE CONTRACTOR ereby certify that the wn�k performed and the materials supplied to date under the terms of the contract r this project, and a u/thorized changes thereto; have an actual value under the contract of the`amounts own on this esti ate gnd e nal quantities on the final estimate are correct), and that this estimate is just d correct an o pa��mount Due This Estimate" has been received. 'ontrac�'s Authorized Representative (Title) RTIFICATE OF THE ENGINEER ereUy certify that I have prepared or examined this estimate, and that the contractor is entitled to payment this estimate under the contract for reference project. Y OF FRIDLEY, INSPECTOR Date: �^ �.1 � F - � �. , - 1 ,,� y\ Respectfully Submitted ' ��---_ �, � ` - �/ �/� cked I3y _ �_ -,c/ '�_.___ _ Jolin G. Flora, PE Director of Public Works 13.15 PAGE 3 ',:'1`iita:`I:[� :�:: : ::::::: 6.00 3.00 3.00 74.00 2.00 52.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 900_00 150.00 375.00 2,331.00 4,600.00 1,768.00 1,300.00 3,876.00 $581,442.83 CITY OF FRIDLEY M E M O R A N D II M �a TO: WILLIAM A. BIIRN3, CITY MANAGER � FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR WILLIAM A. CHAMPA, CITY CLERR SIIBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING FOR SIICCESSFIIL CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT, INC. FOR AN INTOXICATING LIQIIOR LICENSE DATE: JUNE 19, 1997 On the June 23 City Council agenda is a public hearing to consider the approval of an intoxicating liquor license for Successful Concept Development, Inc. (Main Event), located at 7820 University Avenue Northeast. A Public Hearing Notice is attached for your review. Pursuant to Chapter 603 Section .07 of the Fridley City Code, we are required to hold a public hearing before issuing this license. The Poliee Department has performed the required background investigation on Main Event and Public Safety Director Sallman has not found any reason to deny this request. 14.01 CITY OF FRIDLEY PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Fridley will hold a public hearing at the City Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue Northeast on June 23, 1997 at 7:30 p.m, on the question of issuing an Intoxicating Liquor License to Successful Concept Development, Inc. (Main Event) for the property located at 7820 University Avenue. Hearing impaired persons planning to attend who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 no later than June 19, 1997. Anyone having an interest in this matter should make their interest known at this public hearing. William A. Champa City Clerk Publish: June 12, 1997 14.02 MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: June 19, 1997 TO: William Burns, City Manager,� � FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Second Reading of an Amendment to Section 11.01 of the City Charter At the May 19, 1997 meeting, the City Council conducted a public hearing for an amendment to Section 11.01 of the City Charter to amend the definition of "public utilities" to include wireless communication antennae. Minnesota Statute requires that an ordinance amending the City Charter must be adopted by the City Council by "an affirmative vote of all its members". The purpose of the amendment is to provide the legal foundation to enable the City to lease public land and facilities to wireless communication providers. In addition, the amendment will provide the City Council with the flexibility to determine whether it should pursue ownership and operation of wireless communicatian facilities. The proposed amendment simply clarifies what a public utility is and does not dictate to the City Council which utility it should undertake. According to the City Attorney, a referendum must be passed by 2/3 of the voters before the City Council can pass an ordinance to operate a utility. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance for second reading. BD/dw M-97-291 15.01 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 11.01 OF THE CITY CHARTER The Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: Section 11.01 of the City Charter is hereby amended by adding the following sentence: "For purposes of this section, public utilities shall include water works, district heating systems, gas, light, power, heat, wireless or other communication services, br any other product or service the public provision of which the City Council, by ordinance, shall determine to be in the interest of its citizens." PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1997. NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR ATTEST: WILLIAM A. CHAMPA - CITY CLERK Public Hearing: May 19, 1997 First Reading: June 9, 1997 Second Reading: Publication: 15.02 � � William W. Burns MEMORANDl1M CityManager C(TY OF FRIDLEY TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: William W. Burns, City Manager�� DATE: June 19, 1997 SUBJECT: Settlement of Paragon Issue At the May 19, 1997, City Council meeting, Council tabled the agenda item settling the dispute between the City of Fridley and Paragon Cable. As I interpreted the discussion, Council wanted assurances that the terms of the settlement did not establish a precedent for future interpretation of the franchise, or establish the principle that any of the City's out of pocket costs would not be eligible for reimbursement shouid the cable operation once again be subject to transfer of ownership. The city attorney, Fritz Knaak, has worked with the attorney for Pazagon, John Gibbs, to incorporate the language desired by Council. The attached letter of satisfaction incorporates the terms of the agreement. Staff requests that Council authorize the City Manager to sign the atta.ched letter of satisfaction with Paragon Cable. Although we did not get everything we initially asked for, the agreement does provide for reimbursement of all of our attorney's fees associated with the transfer of ownership from Houston Industries Incorporated to Timer Warner Inc. Thank you for your reconsideration of this matter. WWB:rsc Attachment 16.01 _ UTYOF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY MUN[C[PAL CENTER • 6431 UNIVERS(TY AVE. N.E. FR[DLEY, MN SSa32 •(612) 571-3450 • FAX (612) 571-1287 June , 1997 Mr. Wayne Knighton Division President Paragon Cable 801 Plymouth Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55411 Re: Satisfaction of Conditions of City of Fridley Resolution No. 36-1995 Dear Mr. Knighton: This letter is intended to notify you that the City of Fridley, Minnesota, has agreed to settle its current dispute with your company regarding the payment of certain of its costs, professional fees and expenses incurred as a result of the City's investigation into the transaction in which control of Paragon Cable's parent company, KBLCOM, Incorporated, changed from Houston Industries, Incorporated to Time Warner, Inc. As a result of this settlement, the City of Fridley is hereby acknowledging that the conditions set forth in Resolution No. 36-1995 related to approval of the above-mentioned transfers have been satisfied and that there are no remaining areas of disagreement. In particular, the City has received and reviewed evidence of the completion of the transaction, the requisite opinions of Time Warner legal counsel, and reimbursement, as agreed, for its reasonable costs, expenses and professional fees incurred as a result of the City's approval of the transfer of control. This agreement and this Letter of Satisfaction will not bind the City ar Paragon Cable or its successors to any future position concerning franchise fees or reimbursement of City's costs resulting from similar studies required by any future sale of Paragon Cable or a substantial portion of its assets. Sincerely, William W. Burns City Manager /rsc 16.02 C1TY OF FRIDLEY PROJECT SUMMARY 7839 Eim Street N.E. Special Use Permit Agenda Item: Appiicant: James Randers Case Number: SP #97-04 Application:: Date: April 18, 1997 Staff Review�r: M. McPherson Mee#ing Date: June 4, 1997 June 23, 1997 City Manager Authorization ,� DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST• The petitioner, Jim Randers, owner of Display Arts, requests that a special use permit be granted to allow an increase in lot coverage from 40% to 50%. If approved, Mr. Randers proposes to construct a 50' x 60' (3,000 square foot) addition to the building located at 7839 Elm Street N.E. The purpose of the proposed addition is to provide additional space for the assembly of commercial displays. In addition to the special use permit request, the petitioner is also processing variance requests pertaining to building setback, lot area, parking, and parking setback requirements. SUMMARY OF ISSUES• Section 205.18.03.C.(4).(a) &(b) establishes two factors which are to be considered in determining the impact of an increase in lot coverage. Those factors are the net impact on the total amount of hardsurface area and whether or not all other ordinance requirements can be met. The petitioner's proposal increases the amount of hardsurface area on the property. The petitioner has requested several variances to the M-2 district requirements, therefore, they " cannot be met. There are alternatives the petitioner could pursue to reduce the number of variances requested. RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request to the City Council. This recommendation is based on the fact that the proposal does not reduce the amount of existing hardsurface on the property, and the petitioner cannot meet the setback and parking requirements of the M-2 district. PLANNING COMMlSSION ACTION• The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the request to the City Council with the stipulations recommended by staff. The petitioner agreed to completely reconfigure the sidewalk to further reduce the amount of hardsurface on the site (additional 44 square feet). CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the staff recommendation. 1 �.01 Project Summary SP #97-04, by James Randers Page 3 WEST: Zoning: TH: Zoning: EAST: Zoning: N RTH: Zoning: Site Planning Issues: REQUEST ADJACENT SITES: M-2, Heavy Industriaf M-2, Heavy Industrial M-2, Heavy Industrial M-2, Heavy Industrial Land Use: Industriaf Land Use: . Industrial Land Use: Industrial Land Use: Industrial The petitioner, Jim Randers, owner of Display Arts, requests that a special use permit be granted to allow an increase in lot coverage from 40% to 50%a. If approved, Mr. Randers proposes to construct a 50' x 60' (3,000 square foot) addition to the building located at 7839 Elm Street N.E. The pu�pose of the proposed addition is to provide additional space for the assembly of commercial displays. In addition to the special use permit request, the petitioner is also processing variance requests pertaining to building setback, lot area, partcing, and parking setback requirements. SITE DESCRIPTION/HISTORY The subject parcel is located one parcel north of 78"' Avenue on Elm Street. The building was constructed in 1974 and is 75' x 140' (10,500 square feet). In 1973, the City granted finro variances; to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 24.5 feet, and to reduce the side yard setback on the south side of the building from 20 feet to 0 feet. A third variance request to reduce the rear yard parking setback from five feet to 0 feet was denied by the City Council. Variances to reduce the lot area and to reduce the setback from the alley were not considered. The alley adjacent to the parcel has not been vacated. ANALYSIS In addition to the special use permit request, the petitioner has also requested several variances: 1. To reduce the lot area from 1%Z acres to 27,000 square feet. 2. To reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet. 17.03 Project Summary SP #97-04, by James Randers Page 4 3. To reduce the building setback from an alley right-of-way from 40 feet to 39 feet. 4. To reduce the number of parking stalls from 31 spaces to 15 spaces. 5. To reduce the parking setback from the side lot line from 5 feet to 0 feet, and from an alley right-of-way from 15 feet to 0 feet. On Wednesday, May 28, 1997, the Appeals Commission recommended approval of all variances to the City Council, with the stipulation that the special use permit request to increase the lot coverage from 40% to 50% be approved. Section 205.18.03.C.(4).(a) &(b) requires the City to consider the following two factors in determining the effect of the increase in lot coverage: A. For existing developed properties, the total amount of existing hardsurface areas shall be evaluated to determine whether a reduction in the total building and parking . coverage can be achieved. In other words, to justify 10% additional lot coverage the building area may increase, however as a trade-off, the hardsurface area (parking, etc.) should decrease. B. The petitioner shall prove that all other ordinance requirements are met, including but not limited to parking, storm water management, and landscaping. Hardsurface The petitioner is proposing to construct a 50' x 60' addition. This addition would occur in an area that is currently green space. This creates a 3,000 square foot increase in hardsurface. In addition to the proposed building, a sidewalk along the front of the building and a driveway to an overhead door in the rear are also proposed. This creates an additional increase of 477 square feet, for a total increase in hardsurface area of 3,477 square feet. To offset some of the proposed increase, the petitioner could remove a portion of the sidewalk which exists in the front of the building; however, this would only provide a 676 square foot reduction in the proposed increase of hardsurface (2,801 square feet). Other Ordinance Requirements The petitioner has submitted a request for several variances. The variances for lot area and parking setback reduction are for existing conditions. The petitioner could reduce the width of the addition to 40 feet which would eliminate the side yard setback variance and would further reduce the increase in hard surface. The variance request for the setback from the alley right-of-way could also be eliminated by reducing the addition's length by one foot_ Required parking was calculated based on the identified uses within 17.04 Project Summary SP #97-04, by James Randers Page 5 the building as submitted by the petitioner. Using the speculative ratio of one space per 700 square feet of building area, 19 spaces as opposed to 31 spaces are required. The site, however, only provides 15 spaces. Display Arts employs 13 people. For reuse of the property, it will be important to insure that a new use would not create a parking demand greater than the supply. A grading and drainage plan was submitted by the petitioner. Jon Haukaas, Assistant City Engineer, reviewed this information and has no pending requirements for the petitioner (see memo dated May 30, 1997). The petitioner submitted a landscape plan showing existing and proposed materials. The proposed materials meet the code requirements, however, to mitigate the total impact of the addition, additional materials could be required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION The proposal does not reduce the amount of existing hardsurface on the property, and the petitioner cannot meet setback and parking requirements of the M-2 district. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request to the City Council. If the Commission chooses to recommend approval of the request, staff recommends the following stipulations 1. The landscape plan shall be amended as follows: a. Substitute a rubrum maple for the proposed Marshall's Ash. b. Add six flowering crabapples or plums; four in front and two in the green area in the rea r. c. Add two additional Black Hills Spruce at the front (northwest corner of the building). 2. The green area on the east side of the addition shall not be converted to hardsurface. 3. The sidewalk in front of the building shall be removed as indicated in the drawing "site modifications". 4. The petitioner acknowledges that the site is deficient in parking and future reuse of the building will require a tenant with similar or less parking space demands or processing a special use permit for off-site parking. 5. Variance request, VAR #97-05, shall be approved. 17.05 Project Summary SP #97-04, by James Randers Page 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION• The Planning Commission voted unanimousiy to recommend approval of the request to the City Council with the stipulations recommended by staff. The petitioner agreed to completely reconfigure the sidewalk to further reduce the amount of hardsurface on the site (additional 44 square feet). CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the staff recommendation. 17.06 nl l wme � n11 ' ��,' ' / ��`r '/�� a'` --�t.Fr ''� � 't..- 3 . = -' il �K ` .�� ' b ,� f7 � � i qF .- $' � ' �^5 ' '� --` {J£!'�,\� �� _ - ��k�� a �5��'+ .� � _ =�i� . li.� •m c 4 Y y�� t _ :M2 M1 IL � . ti ! . wrwv�c mw��c � - 4 t `�- 4 , i .. � . � � � � ��_ *� ww�.e ww,e.c wwc�c _ � �� . ��u► ♦ ,� I ��r � -- I I��1�� ! ►� � ��► 'i ► �� ► � � / , ► ��►1 � 7�nirg Desig�afions; � Fi-1 - a,e Farriy Units � F�2 - Two Famiy tJMs o �3 -�� R a- nnon��e ri«►,e � Puo - ��,ea u�:c �,c � s� - M�de � n�9nb«r,00d C7 s2 - �x a�;a � G1 - Local Business 0 G2 - General &siness � G3 - Gener-al Stnpping - GR1- General Offioe o n�, - � ��;� o n�.z - � �� nn3 - a,cdo« i�,c� r�,,, i�,d. � RR - Ra�roads i � P - Public Faalities O �� 0 Po(�ff-0E-WAY I � �p� � � i pE ? ■,.- SP #97-04, 7839 Elm Strcet This request, by Jim Randers of Display Arts, would allow construction af a 3,000 square foat addition. A special use permit to incxe�ase the lot ooverage to 50% is requested. - � , � � �� N A �� p�� t�'dYYft fi0fT1 Of�ICIe� f800fC�5 � on Or�nanoe Nb. 70 and Z�oning Nlap efFectiv�e dake 1/27/56 anoes adopted�� ve as d��1�7j �� The Gty of Fric/ey has taken every ef�ort to pr�o- VId2 tll@ fllO6t 11�i10-C� I�OfiYl�lOf19V811�@. The data p�esented hene is subjed tio ci�arx�e. The City of Fridey will not be �espor�siWe for �1 i'ffOf5 af US�2 Of �118 f�OqlTlBf�. - SP ��97-04 y �t �� t. �� y�� James Randers � � � �t �tj - ;= 1�� Ea��! �' �� no�u,,W -,c�,� III i8' �� slbd �v,�sia es � �-- J: i�� fl�� o� uo�1�PPV pasodo�d �� a � � � � � � � al � Q . >.. ..� " t < =J � � � - .� � � i � ` � � 6; �o �� :� °_° ��l,°�;f�� .� � 3 � ::� �i�. � ��l �� i� � . � ' 40 �� .- � � �r0l� qn°! � � � � �'�� q� �, ; �,�', �� i �� ll ��Fls q f� � �n� ',.� ; Ir�j�i�3} �� '= jit;i �111i p 1 �� ;e � �'�j;y�t�t��; �� !�i i) 7--- a i 1►�._..._ �[� ��#.I.,.�:iL+l �lii� s .� . s r .. . � d 0� � u � � _ _ O � �. . st 2 - �� <g' �; y e on$ ! �- ='"o��y � � W �.i 9 0 �iR� `u � 3io � T7� � t • S i Z� o 0 � t� � � � i � E � �s=� _ =o o -�v __ � .o, �� _��, o. o�o o� I < � O O ry0L � � � � �� L__._._._. i ca 1371ai Ry i 17.08 / 1 � � — — ��—�—.—_J � .1 �a , �� . _ �` s;:'s ,�e �.;� ;>; �� =r �,; �;��°�ia j,�t �� y y 0 � SP ��57-04 �� @e �� y a S - � j �lft�� , :' Y�� t�G�Ey: _' ��' e'losawlw '��j I I I �" �� e°`9=BS �� S121d .�dldSia gs �� . iil ��Q�s�� ' �o� uot�!PPd pasodo�d E � � � � Q � � 17.09 .. f/ ; ;. C� � � -: � : ,�� 8��1 ��C�»�»�i • 0��1 � ��I = 6��9��31 � � �—�—� o �C �; �� 0 �� .��. �o �� —+ � 0 o¢ � 0 �� O �� ,�r� ;a � y � � v��.i= ;�� e ' � � ,e�'e!', n s �� .xY 9 } rf � � � ` �� 9�� rn � � i� �� _��! � ��`k 7 a � � � � t \V � - SP ��9?-04 � IE4 li� �� 11 J m � .J � �i=t' i � �� , � �� )�� Y t' � °�°�°wiw �t?IP�� I I I ;� �,�' L�'"�� S121Y JldldSia e y � s CYi � � J. i11 ��o�� o� uoil.iPPN pasodo�d E �� a R f � �� . I I z i 9 � I �� k � � b � I I � I y� 3 � a �� r� � �: �: � C� 17.10 - M,� __... � �� . . .I . . � f � h CAR 03RELLE - LandSurveyors ' ' ,.^i,:��:; ., `� . Eden Prai�ie, MN 55344 . •. �. . , "' 1 •••7I�,� .�.� •!' . ��riiti�a�% �t �urv�� SP ��9�-04 . - � Survey For Jamee aandere b Jenice storebo Book 3�a Page �� File rs � � 7839 Elm Stteet NortAeeat Frldley, MN � . . ..: �_� i � ' � • i.�j � '�. � . , ' : �'i�.� . . �;.' �• •�� .L� Scele: 1"�30' . � ' . ..•,';�.:':; ...; �'_. � Denotee iron rtpn.lound �� , ! - --,34..r-- � .�r��', . .. :, R ' +,` • f6 i .. ' . a � • � . • . u � ,�` _ . . . ;: � .,�- �, ,� . t- .1,y ,` •-. � : ;'1, _ '�' I . ' . � . • . �� - - ! � - �� . , . . •^ ' • . ' . ; . � �J.��- \� ♦♦ \ 7/•�` \ • L �� N x . � �S' . . c — ` -- — — — ' — Y � I: . ; � .• �� o� : ,. . . ,� � . ♦ ,� h N ,�,�f�; • � � Q _ ! r .; . ' ai�/ I°. .r m ; , �: o I , . . Y� � . ' �c � � - `''.�a , T . . . . -�,�I��\ � �� — — ,�- _ � , , . �: � . � m $ � 8 r�.�x � • �•�� Q\ ¢ � : : �. �. \.,. � �. # \ .,.: . `:'•, �;.r � . V ° � . � , � I ` �-•� S _ S � S � • � ` 4, _ vJ _ v✓ . wl - \ � � - . ` � — J � � :' . - t -- � , � — ,__,` ; . =� ' . � , � \ � `�. I . ' ' - so'_ o o� ,.�� . �� '� ' . ' ' ' � C...c. (31...k o Btd `� 1t � . • �� . ___. � I hereby c�rtlfy to Jamee B, Rrnder� enA Janice S. Storebo, huaband eind wife, TCT Hank �� Sevi�q� fnb end, Old Republic Title Znaurnoce Company that thie is a true and correct � � repr�eentetion of a eurvey of ., ' Lote Tw�nty-four to Tl+enty-eight (�4 to 28) inclu�ive, Block One (l), Onevny, accordinq to the plat thereof on file nnd of record in the office of the Reglater ' ot Deede in end for aeid 1►nokn County, Hinneeot+, � and correctly ehowa the locetion of nll building, atructurea, and improvemnnte on eaid deacribed propertyt that ther� nre no vieible encroechmente onto ad�oininq propertiee, atreeta, or alleya by wny of aeid buildinqa, atructures, or improvem�nla, that there are no vinible riqht-of-wey• or eeaements on eald de�crlbed property other thrn shown the�eoo� that there are no party Walls or �1eib1� nneroechrtient� on srld �i��crlb.:d prope�rty by bulldlnqa, atructures, or other improvemente eltuated on ad1oining propPrty except n� ehewn on nald plat of aurvey. Da�ed thie zr�"dey of J�� , 1993. , � = � / �/ Frenk . Cn dare Steto R�sq, Ho. 6508 - . •I . • 17.11 F pt f- � y SP �i97-04 � p t ��i �� J R y� r'�� it� r �' �� osaw�W •�(�� I I =� t'j r��`�t�i �� S.12iV .lVldSld ai �� s e--- �: ii� ��fitf �# �o� uo�l!PPb' pasodo�d �� a � Q � � � � n� W � ^F�--� F� _� - p a u xt = _ " o... J = _ " i " o "sogn$q u ~ �! F z �+.�ai �_�; �u 3 � ..� cz° — ��n x �z y p o as �� ^.. _ <�Z° � t no oid ��e� 04 _� �� o� =�o.o � �� .: �=q�� o�.: . >.. .+u �: i _< J� � . � �0 �V � � � � �'� �o � �;;, > > �� o.� °� � ��i,°� �f�� a � � `f � q � �i�, � �� . � ' �Q �� sa� 3^; - -�� ! Qq t �:Sl� �Y �i � � ! �� !� ,t. �� s� i �� >> ��fis y '� � �;� ;r s - �(��t':�1 �it� s- ifii ��1 � � �� ! � '�t; !t!!�i� �Iii �F �) �.,.. � 1 �..._..._.. �EI� ��llSti��ztl.11ll �j])I i � � s t , y � �� ,.Jll�� - _� � � " 1 � , \" ��.. s��- :� � i C� -�--�-��-�--�-.-.- I�R�I�II�lllll I � � �� L_____ .� � — — — � — — � aBias n'a �� 1�.12 � ' � , _ _ 3,_._ _ .l :; �a .. .. �B � I , �: �� Er ! �1a �is �i� �y•; �rs � � ��'i �ry . ! � �� =1�1«� y Y. . � � o' � a� � a� � 0 � — c� � � VJ ��'R';-:'.� ;i'?�,'a<�: � � � � �■ � O � . � � �� Eiig�nccring �'� y $eWl•� F Y WTter 2 � O Pa��r. p � sucots VU Meinlenante w -+ 2 m O � a MEMORANDUM TO: Michele McPherson, Planning Assistant FROM: Jon H. Haukaas,�Assistant Director Public Works DATE: May 30, 1997 SUBJECT: Display Arts PW97-152 I have reviewed the plans and drainage calculations for proposed addition for Display Arts and have found the additional runoff created to be within an acceptable range. No additional storm runoff storage will be required. 17.13 CITY OF FRIDLEY PROJECT SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The petitioner, Jim Randers, owner of Dispiay Arts, requests that several variances be granted to allow construction of a 3,000 square foot addition to property located at 7839 Elm Street. The proposed addition is 50 feet by 60 feet. The purpose of the addition is to provide additional space for the assembly of commercial displays. The proposed request by the petitioner increases the lot coverage from 40% to 50%a. City Code requires approval of a special use permit to allow an increase in lot coverage to 50%. This request will be reviewed by the Pfanning Commission on June 4, 1997. SUMMARY OF ISSUES: Five variances have been requested including lot area, side yard setback, setback from the alley, number of parking stalls, and parking setbaak. This building is located in the Onaway district. The Onaway district is the oldest industrial park located within the City of Fridley. The building originally received finro variances in 1973 prior to its construction. Those variances included the reductions in rear yard and side yard setback. It is difficult to develop in the Onaway district without granting variances due to the size of the lots. The variances requested by the petitioner are within previously granted requests. RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPEALS COMMISSION: Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend denial of that portion of the request to reduce the setback from the alley right-of-way from 40 feet to 39 feet. The remaining variances are within previously granted requests. If the Commission chooses to recommend approval of the request to the City Council, staff recommends the following stipulation: Special Use Permit request, SP #97-04, shall be approved. APPEALS COMMISSION ACTION: The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the variance request to the City Council with the stipulation recommended by staff. CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: Staff had no recommendation for the Appeals Commission regarding 4 of the 5 variances, but stipulated approval of Special Use Permit, SP #97-04, if the Commission recommended approval of the variance request. If the Council denies the special use permit, the variances should also be denied. 18.01 Project Summary VAR # Page 2 PROJECT DETAILS Petition For: A variance to: 1. Reduce the lot area from 1%2 acres to 27,000 sq. ft. 2. Reduce the si de yar d setback from 20 ft. to 10 ft. 3. Reduce the building setback from an alley right-of-way from 40 ft. to 39 ft. 4. Reduce the number of parking stalls from 31 to 15 5. Reduce the parking setback from the side lot line from 5 ft. to 0 ft. and from an alley right-of-way from 15 ft. to 0 ft. Location of Property: Legal Description of Property: Size: Topography: Existing Vegetation: Existing Zoning/Platting: Availability of Municipal Utilities: Vehicular Access: 7839 Elm Street Lots 24-28, Block 1, Onaway Addition 27,000 square feet Flat Typical suburban; trees and sod M-2, Heavy Industrial; Onaway District 1911 Connected Elm Street Pedestrian Access: N/A Engineering Issues: Comprehensive Planning Issues: The Zoning and Comprehensive Plans are consistent in this location. 18.02 Project Summary VAR # Page 3 Public Hearing Comments: To be taken ADJACENT SITES: WEST: Zoning: M-2, Heavy Industrial Land Use: Industrial SOUTH: Zoning: EAST: Zoning: NORTH: Zoning: Site Planning Issues: REQUEST: M-2, Heavy Industrial M-2, Heavy Industrial M-2, Heavy Industrial Land Use: industrial Land Use: Industrial Land Use: Industrial The petitioner, Jim Randers, owner of Display Arts, requests that several variances be granted to allow construction of a 3,000 square foot addition to property located at 7829 Elm Street. The proposed addition is 50 feet by 60 feet. The purpose of the addition is to provide additional space for the assembly of commercial displays. The addition proposed by the petitioner increases the lot coverage from 40% to 50%. City Code requires approval of a special use permit to allow an increase in lot coverage to 50%. This request will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on June 4, 1997. SITE DESCRIPTION/HISTORY: The subject property is located one parcel north of 78�' Avenue on Elm Street. The building was constructed in 1974 and is 75 feet wide by 140 feet long. In 1973, the City granted variances to reduce the rear yard setback from 25 feet to 24.5 feet and to reduce the side yard setback on the south side of the building from 20 feet to 0 feet. A variance to reduce the rear yard parking setback from 5 feet to 0 feet was denied by the City Council. It appears that a reduction of lot area and a reduction in the setback from the alley was not considered. The alley adjacent to the parcel has not been vacated. ANALYSIS: Code Sections 18.03 Project Summary VAR # Page 4 Section 205.18.03.A requires a minimum lot area of 1%Z acres for one main buiiding. Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide for adequate parking area, open landscaped areas, and to limit congestion of industrial areas. The petitioner requests that the required lot area be reduced from 1'/2 acres (65,340 square feet) to 27,000 square feet. The original building was constructed on a site of 27,000 square feet. Denial of the lot area variance would render the property non- buildable and preclude the petitioner from construction the addition on the site. Section 205.18.03.D.(2) requires finro side yards, each with a width of not less than 20 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide for adequate open space around industrial structures for aesthetic and fire-fighting purposes. The petitioner requests that the side yard setback be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. This will allow the construction of an addition which is 50 feet wide. The petitioner's business designs and assembles commercial displays for trade shows, and a width of 50 feet is required to assemble these displays. The petitioner could, however, determine a means of assembling displays without a width of 50 feet, thereby reducing the width of the addition to 40 feet and complying with the setback requirement. This request is within previously granted requests as the City granted a side yard setback to 0 feet for the same property in 1973. Section 205.18.03.D.(4).(b) requires permitted buildings to not be any closer to any alley right-of-way line than 40 feet. Public purpose served by this requirement is to provide adequate operation for parking and green space from the alley. In 1973, it appears that previous City staff did not acknowledge the required setback of 40 feet from an alley right-of-way. They applied a reduction in the rear yard building setback from 25 feet to 24 feet. The petitioner proposes to extend the addition along a line 39 feet from the alley right-of-way. A further reduction in the addition of one foot would eliminate this variance and further reduce the lot coverage. This variance request is unusual in that there are few alleys in the City which are adjacent to this type of development. The petitioner, however, can meet this code �equirement relatively easily, and staff recommends that this request be denied, Section 205.18.05.0 requires a specific number of parking spaces based on the use or uses within a building. 18.04 Project Summary VAR # Paae 5 Public purpose served by this requirement is ensure that the site provides adequate off- street parking. The required number of parking stalls with the proposed addition is 31. This is based on the breakdown of space within the building for office, manufacturing, and warehousing as provided by the petitioner. If the speculative ratio of 1 space per 700 square feet of building is applied, 19 spaces would be required. The site provides 15 off-street parking spaces, and parking is allowed on the adjacent streets. City Code requires that a development provide adequate off-street parking spaces or proof of parking which guarantees adequate spaces for the required number of spaces. The City, however, has previously granted a similar variance and this variance request does not exceed that request. Section 205.18.05.D.(5).(b) &(c) requires that all parking and hard surface areas shall be no closer than 5 feet from any lot line; and that all parking and hard surface areas shall be no closer than 15 feet from any alley right-of-way. Public purpose served by this requirement is to reduce visual pollution in areas adjacent to lot lines and alley rights-of-way. Two parking setback reductions are requested, from the side lot line from 5 feet to 0 feet and from an alley right-of-way from 15 feet to 0 feet with existing conditions. The alley right-of-way is somewhat unique in that there are few indust�ial developments adjacent to alley rights-of-way. The adjacent properties have similar setbacks; however, it does not appear that the City has formally acknowledged these setback reductions. The petitioner could provide a 5 foot hard surface separation from the side setback; however, this would further reduce the number of available parking stalls on site. The reduction in the parking setback from the side lot line from 5 feet to 0 feet, however, is within previously granted requests. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE APPEALS COMMISSION: Staff recommends that the Appeals Commission recommend denial of that portion of the request to reduce the setback from the alley right-of-way from 40 feet to 39 feet. If the Commission chooses to recommend approval of the request to the City Council, staff recommends the following stipulation: Special Use Permit request, SP #97-04, shall be approved. APPEALS COMMISSION ACTION: The Appeals Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the variance request to the City Council with the stipulation recommended by staff_ 18.05 Project Summary VAR # Page 6 CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION:\ Staff had no recommendation for the Appeals Commission regarding 4 of the 5 variances, but stipulated approval of Special Use Permit, SP #97-04, if the Commission recommended approval of the variance request. If the Council denies the specia� use permit, the variance request should also be denied. 18.06 � � I � �„'� � _ .�.: � ��"�:;�_�. � � ' 1�� ,� � � � ` � �_; t � � _ `�.��'` ` 1�' . , ` FS �„�.. , � �� S - _ �;�.: s�� j aA�� `��+. �) �� _ - ��$�-_,5 '� _ e. _,�, _ • re M � t■� �■ . r ,� � w- �.�:� �� { � � i•��"�� u► � �� r��r � _ � �� ! �. . . ,`�� V ► �!� i / � /► , , ��►1 � ZaNf19 �CSlgi�pl$: Cj R-1 - �e Farrily UniLs � R 2- Two Farriiy Urrts � R-3 - Ger�al AAltiple lkrts � R-4 - Nbbile 1-brr�e Parks PlA - Planned lkit De�lo�xr�ent � S1 - F1yde Park Neighborhood 0 s2 - ��,►�,� a�c�c � ci - t.� e�� cz - c�� e�� 0 G3 - C�eneral SFx�pping - GR1- Ge�eral offioe 0 M-1 - Light �ndustrial � N4�2 - Neavy Indsfial 0 N/�3 - Outdoor Inte�ive Heavy Ind. � RR - Railroads � P - Pubiic Facilities Q wn7Ea f� Po(�iT-OF WAY nws�e /P� " I L � / ` � � � � Vi4R #97-05, 7839 Elm Street This request, by Jim Randers of Display Arts, would allow constn�ction aF a 3,000 square foot addition. A nurr�ber of setbadc varianoes are requested. --------- 1 �.07 � C1 �: �� i'� �i N A I Corrpied ard drain� irom offidal rec«ds based o� o�ar�r,oe n�a �o and za�ing nAa�, effe�ne d26e 127/56 tiogether vath all orci� araes adopted and effective as c�F ?J1 197. � �/ Of Ffl�/ �$1dICCf1 ��/ f�fOft 10 (NtD- VIC�1112 fi106f Up-10-�@ I�fiDfTTl�lUf1 a1/a112b�@. The data pr�serded hene is sibject to charx�e. The C'ity d Fridey will not be �spor�sible for lJf1�OfE,'9EEY1 �f110�S Of U5�(,' Of �115 dOGJftI�'�K. �" �i ��tF�t� �� t�� , - � "= �'�� i`�7f= `' �p� �lcsaa,�w ��N� I I I <u �j� �i�t!�� $�� 5.�.�d �dld��d d y �� E �� J: i�� F�� o� uoil�PPd pasodo�d �� Q � � � 7'' , � a � � Q n �_ - o ., W =�_ _ u �W� � s > ' : � =gY O N • C w1r�jy2 �_�� :W 3=� ��'i _ � �.. x �i �S° <�<�=o � _ �o o =ns .- • e � is ,+�+ � :,°. V S� r C M °Y'10 s r V NM • � 2 O Q gr� O.vFni � . � >.. � .�: i � ` j � ? � �J � � :, �� ` ��1 �� i� � , ` r } �t#! �Si� !:! � � �� i!'• ' � �'!�i !ri s � � ~, '�Y � �Y�[ 'M ' ,f � �_�a � ! � � �� p y � � �•� � s� �o i�a • ' s �r gc �i,�i �� . 1��°t s Iji W� i [;;� � � � �Y �! �� ti15 q � �;�ei� � � .1j��T �J�ii 00 �y!�'�6;'��1�1�� [ ��;; ��i� J�; � � �E�� iiaii:� liii ,�� _.. .�. < [l�5� �_.......«� � s .� � s t � � ti . . . . . . j + ��_ � �� '�- �� ,�' � :�� ,. : ��[ � i � � � I � �pp9� � g9 Y ioa 6 � � � � �.—.—.—.�._ � 9 C9 17f1Y �. _ I�€I f'I I III � � � � � �� 8 F� tl I �� . . ._.�._.� �'� �'�'_'_-J n`.a ' 1BI4S 1IH � • � • , • . < �, �� ! FE ,. �Tqi F� ��-z aea �ra �3� 'js �:� � y �� ; ��El�� ,�# �,r�,l�� y ! � C� �a �� Y ��''�� #� �'� �' :' Y�� i��i : �� l. e7osawlw '�� ;� �i` e�"��! �� S12ld �VldSld gi �� s N 1I1 _ _� � J: �� l, �� o� uoiliPPb' pasodo�d e�� Q �- �- a :: �� .. .. : � C� �; - - �'� - �� A��8��1 0��0»��I � ��1 � ��I ' = 6��9��1 � �--1 C� ��S �� -< O � � � �� --� O �� 0 � � O �� a � 1� O s 4F 6 C �� ii � , ` �� ..: �� -5� �� ,�. wx i .�r � � i �i�� 4 6 �a c � � � � � �t�A �� _ � tR � �;�� ,.� �� ` �� a �.�r ��':� - d� 18.09 ?� � . � � ° � �� y�� Y�� ' .� � �` y�� F1� � g7 � hCf'YUjyq( ��N� � .� �!�� Gj�t�� Sl2ld JldldSla 9y j ! � �� .- � :� � .:� � � < ;il ��. � �a� uoi1�PPN pasodo�d a � � s � � � :y � n yg F BEI Q �; � � �� °, � k � I :, C� �� e, Q � 3I r � I I ; � � , �� e � �Q tlQ ` , C� 18.10 - M.,� --.., � � � �:� ;.I . f � I.NHUAfitLlt � • 941•3031 LandSurveyors ' ` �^i,�•�<; r.; • '.•i��r�! , Eden Pral�ie, MN 55314 . . -: •. �, , �' .y , X., k , . .'� "'. ��rti�ita�e �� urU�� . . . Survey For Ja,,,�a Randere & Jenice st9rebo Book 3�a Page_�0 Fle 7839 Elrt� Street Northeent Fridley, HN • Scele: 1"�30' � Denotee iron mon.found � � h I � BI ' _ -- 1345'-- 1 � f� � ..�" `"' � I �. `�y — — , — 1�'! :}:• � i :.i ; ,-- , � 3S.a�' r� . . � . 7S•D` N ��1: � � -� : �.�,r�. � /-�/ ' ~ � _ •� // L� � � . : \ • ^Y �y � . �� _ �"� , o� —� �; � �� o cfl � — \ v c $ # 4� ``7- . �.,. V o � '' `�*� � � 1� � ; •� c .�� 16' . ; �w : � , I � a I � r . ` :� Y z < a — y � . � a a �. :'_u� ��, . ,� � T ,w J ki J \��` � LJ � � � S _s - S-- � � � �, �: t . . _ .,f,j. � . .. . ' _.�' .+' � �' ... ' % . , ' ;.�. .�; . ..'. � ;• • � . ,' , � � ,� . . .. ' S '• -� � . . , � . , '_i• , ; � :1: � � .• ., , . t ; � ' t� _ vJ _ vJ . v�l - � ^ \ I . — — \ — — � — � _ . . �--'� ' \' j; I w � , . ' • � � , � , • .' ' \ XQ�• I '` , � �. V l• " 1E O�- o � o n i. 1 � �� >� - ... '' ' � l...�.DI.�kDBId �.t " I , . � � __ _� . _._ .. � . I hereby certify to Jecnes e, R�nder� enA Jenice S. Storebo, husband einA wife, TCf Bank � Sevinqs fab end, Old Republic T1tle Ineurenee Coatpany thet thle !a e true ena correct � � representetion of a aurvey of - Lote Tawnty-four to Rr+enty-elght i24 to 28) incluslve, elock One (1), Onewwy, rccordinq to the plat thereof on file rnd of record in the office of the Reqlater ' ot Deeda in and for aaid Anoka County, Hinnenot+, ' and correctly ahowe the location of nll building, structurea, and improvertMnte on aeid deacribed� propertyr thet ther� nre no viaible encroechrtMnte onto ed�oining propertiee, etreeta, or alleye by rny of aald buildinqa, atructure�, or lmprovementa, that there are no viaible riqht-of-weya or easement� on aaid described property other than ahown thereont that there are no party Walls or viaible nncroechmentn on 9rid describ�d property by bulldinga, atructures, or other lmprovementa aituated on ad�oining property except ra eh�wn on aa1c1 plat of aurvey. Dated thia ZSr"dey of J��' , 1993. . �, ' � ) . Frank . Cn daze Ste+to ReQ. No. 6508 � 18.11 I . CITY OF FRIDIEY APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING, MAY 28, 1997 ROLL CALL: Chairperson Kuechle called the May 28, 1997, Appeals Comm 7:31 p.m. , ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent Larry Kuechle, Ken Vos, Carol Beaulieu, Terrie Savage Others Present: Scott Hickok, PI ning Coordinator - Michele McP rson, Planning Assistant Jim Rand , Display Arts Paul St e, Stone Construction Tom hristensen, 190 Satellite Lane Gai & Ed Ahrens, 198 Mercury Drive meeting to order at MOTION b Ms. Savage, seconded by D�. Vos, to approve the April 23, 1997, Appeals Commis 'on minutes as written. 1. �QN A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED E MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQ 1FST VAR #9 -05 BY JAMES RANDERS: Per Section 205.18.03.A of the Fridley Zoning Code, to reduce the minimum lot area from 1 1/2 acres to 27,000 square feet; Per Section 205.18.03.D.(2) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet; Per Section 205.18.03.D.(4).b. of the Fridley Zoning Code, to reduce the setback from an alley right-of-way from 40 feet to 39 feet; Per Section 205.18.05.0 of the F�idley Zoning Code, to reduce the required number of parking stalls from 31 to 15; Per Section 205.18.05.D.(5).(b) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to reduce the parking setback from the side lot line from 5 feet to 0 feet and to reduce the parking setback from an alley right-of-way from 15 feet to 0 feet; 18.12 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING MAY 28 1997 PAGE 2 To allow constnaction of a 3,000 square foot addition on Lots 24-28, Block 1, Onaway Addition, generally located at 7839 Elm Street N.E. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Savage, to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECH�E DEC�ARED THE MOTION CARRfED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:33 P.M. Ms. McPherson stated the petitioner is requesting several variances to allow constnaction of a 3,000 square foot addition to the building located at 7839 Elm Street. Ms. McPherson stated the request will also require a special use permit. The proposed addition will increase the lot coverage from 40% to 50%. A code change adopted several � years ago requires that the Pla�ning Commission and the City Councii approve a special use permit prior to an increase in !ot coverage. The Planning Commission will review that request at its June 4, 1997, meeting. Ms. McPherson stated the subject properly is loca#ed on Eim Street north of 77th Avenue. The property is zoned M-2, Heavy Industrial, as are all the surrounding pa�ceis. Located on the property is a 10,500 square foot buiiding constructed in 1974. Ms. McPherson stated there is a zero lot line along the south property line, and the petitioner is proposing to construct a 60 foot x 50 foot addition along the north properly line reducing the side yard setback from 20 feet down to 10 feet. As the subject parcel is located in the Onaway district which was platted in 1911, the property size is substandard in relation to today's building requirements. The City now requires a 1.5 acre parcel. The subject parcel is 27,000 square feet. A variance was not granted for this reduction in lot area at the time the building was constructed. A reduction in the setback from the alley right-of-way from 40 feet to 39 feet is also being requested. A variance was not processed at the time the building was construc#ed; however, a rear yard setback to the reduce the building setback from 25 feet to 24 feet was processed as an altemative variance request. Ms. McPherson stated that in terms of lot area, the original building was constnacted on a lot of 27,000 square feet. In past similar requests, staff has indicated that denial would render the property unbuildable and the addition would not be possible. It would prevent expansion of this property as it would be a nonconforming lot. In terms of the side yard request, the petitioner has the alternative of reducing the size of the addition down to 40 feet which would eliminate this variance request. It would also �educe the size of the addition to 2400 square feet. This would also reduce the impact to the lot coverage. A variance was granted for this property down to 0 feet on the south property line in 1973 prior to construction of the building. Ms. McPherson stated that in terms of the alley setback reduction from 40 feet to 39 feet, no variance was previously granted for this encroachment. Instead, staff chose to use the rear yard setback of 25 feet down to 24 feet. In this case, the petitioner could reduce 18.13 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING MAY 28 1997 PAGE the size of the addition by 1 foot in order eliminate this variance request and to meet the setback requirement. Staff has recommended denial of this particular po►tion of the variance request. Ms. McPherson stated that in terms of the parking spaces, the petitioner is requesting a reduction in the parking spaces from 31 to 15. This is based on office, warehouse, and assembly uses within the building. She spoke with the petitioner. They have 13 employees so the 15 spaces to be provided on site would suppo�t the number of employees. Using the speculative ratio of 1 space for every 700 square feet of building, only 19 spaces would be required so the 15 provided is a bit closer to the 19 which may be required if unknown uses were located in that building. Parking is available on the street. On-street parking is allowed. However, these spaces cannot be counted as required spaces, and each site is required to have the required number of spaces on site or proof of parking space adequate to provide the required number of spaces. Ms. McPherson stated that in terms of the hard surface setback, there are finro sections to this variance request. The first is from the side lot line reducing the setback from 5 feet to 0 feet and also from the alley right-of-way from 15 feet to 0 feet. The existence of the alley is unique in this particular industrial district. It is an older district. Newer districts do not have alleys so this section of the code applies to a somewhat unique situation. Ms. McPherson stated that in reviewing the development in general, it does not appear that the City has previously enforced the setback nor have variances been applied for or granted to this request. Similar.setbacks are being requested afong the alley on other properties in this vicinity. In terms of the side yard setback, there is opportunity for the petitioner to meet this requirement; however, it would impact the number of spaces able to be required on the property. The request to reduce the side yard setback from 5 feet to 0 feet is within previously granted requests. Ms. McPherson stated that staff recommends denial of the request to reduce the alley setback from 40 feet to 39 feet. Staff has no recommendation rega�ding the remaining requests. They are within previously granted variances. If the Appeals Commission chooses to recommend approval of the request, staff recommends the following stipulation: �• Special Use Permit request, SP #97-04, shall be approved. Ms. Savage asked why there was no hardship statement. Ms. McPherson stated this was an oversight. The petitioner should have submitted a written hardship statement_ She suggested the petitioner verbally provide that information. Dr. Vos asked staff to indicate on the site plan the location for the request for the 39-foot setback. 18.14 Ms. McPherson stated this request is along the rear of the addition. is at 24 feet. A variance was in the file and approved to reduce from 25 feet to 24 feet. Dr. Vos stated the building to the south is at the same setback. Ms. McPherson stated, yes. Mr. Kuechle asked if there were any altematives for more parking. The existing buiiding the rear yard setback Ms. McPherson stated that short of creating an altemative parking space along the front, there v�rould be no altematives for the petitioner to pursue on this site. M�. Randers stated they need the width because they make trade show displays. When they now set up displays, they have to stop manufacturing because they do not have enough space. They need the space to set up the displays in order to keep the shop working while putting up the dispiay. Re ardin front. Every other building in the area d es the sa e' thing.e Park ng als no beenha problem. Right now, people from other nearby buildings are parking in their stalls. They have 13 employees. Salespeople come and go all the time. He did not see the parking as a problem. Mr. Kuechle asked how many salespeople work for the company. Mr. Randers stated they have th�ee salespeople. Dr. Vos asked why they had an addition with a jog. Mr. Randers stated he wanted the entire space even to the back of the building. TYpically, the display can be up to 40 feet wide. Some displays can be 40 feet by 40 feet up to 40 feet by 70 feet. He would rather have the width than the length. Mr. Stone stated they started with a 50 foot by 75 foot addition. In going that distance, they went oVer the 50% lot coverage so they cut it back to stay at the 50% coverage. Dr. Vos asked if the petitioner was going over the 50% coverage. Ms. McPherson stated they are right at 50%. Without the jog in the building, they would be at 52% lot coverage. Mr. Randers stated that regarding paricing, they could park a car in front of the jog. They don't need it, but it is something that could be done. It is now a useless space and could be used for parking. Dr. Vos asked how serious was the request for the setback from 40 feet to 39 feet. 18.15 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING MAY 28 1997 PAGE 5 Mr. Randers stated he would like as much space as he can get, but he did not want to stop the addition f�om going forward ove� 1 foot. M�. Hickok stated the special use permit is to allow 50% lot coverage as opposed to 40% coverage. Ms. Savage asked the petitioner about the hardship. Mr. Randers stated he did not know how to respond. They need additional space. Dr. Vos stated he thought the 27,000 square foot lot is also a hardship. Mr. Randers stated he purchased the property in 1990. He was told he could build on the land. Mr. Stone stated he did not think it would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Most of the buildings in that development have a 0 lot line. MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Dr. Vos, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:48 P.M, Dr. Vos stated he thought the 27,000 square foot lot was something they could not do much about. To him, he would have built without the jog. He would be supportive of having a 40-foot width. With the jog, who would ever know there was a difference in the variance from 39 feet versus 40 feet. Considering there is not a building on that jog, all the buildings are_ flush along there. He would recommend approval of all the requests. Ms. Savage stated she had no strong objection to any of the requests. Mr. Kuechle stated he concuRed. He realizes staff recommended denial of the request from 40 feet to 39 feet; however, because the rest of it is already at 24 feet, it seems they would be putting the petitioner through a bit of to�ture to pull that last foot off when no one is going to notice the difference. He would recommend approval of the requests. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Savage, to recommend approval of Variance Request, VAR #97-05, by James Randers, to reduce the minimum lot area from 1 1/2 acres to 27,000 square feet; to reduce the side yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet; to reduce the setback from an alley right-of-way from 40 feet to 39 feet; to reduce the required number of parking spaces from 31 to 15; and to reduce the parfcing setback from the side �ot line from 5 feet to 0 feet and to reduce the parking setback from an alley right- of-way from 15 feet to 0 feet, to allow construction of a 3,000 square foot addition on Lots 24-28, Block 1, Onaway Additional, generally at 7839 Elm Street N.E_, with the following stipulation: Special Use Permit, SP #97-04, shall be approved. 18.16 APPEALS COMMISSION MEETING MAY 28 1997 PAGE 6 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. McPherson stated the Planning Commission would consider the special use permit on June 4. This item would be considered by the City Council on June 23. 2. Per Section 205.07.03.D.(1) o the Fridley Zoning Code, to reduce the front yard setback from 35 feet to 15 fee to allow the constn.iction of a garage addition on Lot 8, Block 1, Sylvan Hills Plat �, the same being 198 Mercury Drive N.E. MCTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by �r. Vos, to waive the reading of the public hearing not�ce and to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUB Ms. McPherson stated the variance reque: feet to 15 feet. The petitioners are propos style addition in front of the existing garage. :, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED HEARING OPEN AT 7:53 P.M. is to reduce the front yard setback from 35 � to construct a 20 foot by 22 foot tandem- Ms. McPherson stated the property is locate at the intersection of Mercury Drive and Jupiter Drive. The property is zoned R-1, Sing Family, as are most of the surrounding properties. Located to the no�th is the Christen on Crossing development. Located on the property is a single family dwelling with an att ched two-car garage. Ms. McPherson stated staff analysis finds that t� items when considering front yard variance reque the ability for off-street parking. The line of site im� the adjacent property owners but persons enterii perceive the buildings to be set on the street as part it does change the impression of the setback from particular neighborhood. In addition, the off-street 35 feet to 15 feet. Commission typically evaluates two �- the impact to the line of site and �cts may be considered for not only � the neighbofiood and how they the streetscape. With the addition, e street for someone entering this a king area would be reduced from Ms. McPherson stated the petitioners submitted two alte natives. The first is a detached structure in the rear yard. The second is an addition to th east of the existing garage. A detached structure of a similar size wouid require a spe �al use permit and would have some impact to la�dscaping in the rear yard. The se ond alternative would be an addition to the east of the existing structure which poses ome interesting architectural challenges due to the slope of the roof. However, those cou be creatively solved. Ms. McPherson stated the request is within previously grant�d variances; therefore staff has no recommendation. � Ms. Savage asked which of the alternatives would not require a�variance. 18.17 ��