10/20/1997 CONF MTG - 4799�
�
ClTY OF
FRIDLEY
CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE MEETING
October 20, 1997 - 7:00 P.M.
Conference Room A (Upper Level)
1. Franchise Fees for Gas and Electrical Utilities.
2. Update on Telecommunication Ordinance
and Analysis.
3. Proposed Increase in Solid Waste Abatement
Program (Recycling Service) Fee.
4, Options for Walgreen's Redevelopment.
5. Warden Oil Hazardous Site Issue.
6. Rice Creek Bank Stabilization Project.
7. 1998 Council Meeting and Holiday Schedule.
8. Other Business,
Adjourn.
MEMO TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER ��
�
FROM: JOHN G. FLORA, DIItECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
WILLIAM C. AUNT, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER
DATE: OCTOBER 15, 1997
SUBJECT: FRANCHISE FEES FOR GAS AND ELECTRICAL UTII.ITIES
For a number of months we have been exploring the possibility of franchise fees for our gas and
electrical utilities, Minnegasco and Northern States Power (NSP). We have gone over several drafts of
a franchise ageement with NSP representatives, and we have had two meetings recently with
representatives of Mmnegasco. We already have a franchise with 1V�innegasco, so our meetings have
explored the possibilities of enacting a franchise fee ordinance.
Our basic approach has been to accomplish what is possible rather than to seek some ideal or to
maximize what is legally allowable. We have also been concerned about avoiding a lazge public outcry.
The biggest change in the utilities industry over�the past ten years has been the prospect of deregulation
and so called wheeling. It appears that in the future there will be a distinction between production and
transportation so that retail customers can choose their energy provider which may not be the local
utility.
The prospect of retail wheeling has had a number of effects. The possibility of competition lends
greater credibility to the City's argument that there should be some sort of charge for use of the rights-
of-way as a cost of doing business for competing companies who are profiting from its use. Also, a fee
based on gross revenues becomes more problematic. It is not clear that the City could impose a fee on
the cost of production of gas or electricity coming from an outside provider which does not have a
franchise vv�th the City. As a result, more attention is being given to metered charges as a way of
structuring the franchise fee.
The following are some of the major issues raised by the utility companies:
Competition. The utility companies fear that a franchise fee could put them at a competitive
disadvantage relative to providers of other forms of energy or even providers of the same form
of energy who are not subject to a franchise fee. They want to be sure that if a fee is imposed it
does not upset the current competitive balance.
2. Loss of customers. The utility companies fear that a franchise fee might be the straw that
broke the camel's back. They fear that a franchise fee might cause some of their commercial
industrial customers to move to a different area where there is no franchise fee.
Memorandum to William W. Burns
Franchise Fees for Gas and Electrical Utilities
October 14, 1997
Page Two
Communication with customers and shareholders. The utility companies are not in a position
to positively support and promote a franchise fee. As Al Swintek from Minnegasco put it:
"We don't want our customers to think that this is our fee." On the other hand, they will not
actively oppose a modest fee. (NSP is willing to go as far as the equivalent of two percent of
gross revenue as long as Minnegasco is charged the same amount.) The utility companies need
some plausible reasons for going along with the franchise fee. They want us to identify at least
some of the uses to which the additional revenue will be put. They brought up the possibility
of a joint letter to customers and/or a question and answer sheet which we could develop
together.
At a meeting with M'innegasco representatives on October 6, 1997, we discussed the following uses of
additional revenue from franchise fees:
1. Community oriented policing initiatives
2. Building the double gymnasium at the Fridley Community Center
3. Additional operating costs of the Fridley Community Center and Hayes Gymnasium
4. Additional maintenance on the Hwy 65, University Ave., and East River Road
corridors to enhance the City's image for economic development
5. Replacing the chain link fence on University Avenue
6. Continuing to fund youth programs when state and federal grants run out, e.g. Safety
Net, Zone, Blast, DARE
7. Additional street lights (NSP fees)
Implicit in these uses are the City's efforts to hold the line on property taxes at a time of declining state
and federal funding for cities and changing tax capacity rates wl�uch erode our tax capacity.
The City Council asked staff to explore the passibility of finding several other cities willing to enter into
joint negotiations with the utility companies. We pursued this idea both through the Suburban Rate
Authority (SRA) and through contacts with neighboring cities. The executive committee of the SRA
decided not to authorize expenditure of funds for such joint negotiations.
On May 22, 1997, representatives from Lauderdale, IViinnetonka, New Brighton, Robbinsdale,
Roseville, and Fridley met to discuss the possibility of joint negotiations. Champlin and Bloomington
had also expressed interest but did not attend. The participants were not able to find enough common
ground to enable them to engage in joint negotiations. It would almost require a joint powers
ageement for such negotiations to be feasible, and we already have the SRA.
At this time it does not appear likely that the City will be able to find partners for joint negotiations
with NSP and Minnegasca
The Council also expressed interest in a"conservation franchise formula (CFF)." That would be an
arrangement by which the first portion of total usage would be exempted from the franchise fee. This
would place less of the burden of the franchise fee on residential customers who used relatively small
amounts of energy.
�
Memorandum to William W. Burns
Franchise Fees for Gas and Electrical Utilities
October 14, 1997
Page Three
John Flora and I explored this concept with attorney Tim Strommen, Executive Director of the SRA.
After researching the matter he concluded:
My conclusion following this review is that, though a laudable and creative approach to
franchise fees, the City may face legal and practical problems if it imposes a CFF.
There is no absolute baz in the statutes or cases to a CFF fee. There appear to be a number of
hurdles, however. Most of them would surface during the NSP-negotiation, public hearing
process. Yet the final proof of such a fee program would only be known after a paiticularly
cold winter and hot summer. This approach is commendable and possibly workable, but it
brings with it greater complexity and uncertainty than a more typical franchise fee formula.
From our discussions to date it seems that imposition of a two percent franchise fee is a possibility
The revenue would be approximately as follows:
NSP
11�innegasco
Totals
Annual Revenue
$ 24,195,483
14,410,870
$ 38,606,353
Two Percent
483,910
288,217
$ 772,127
We have developed a number of scenarios based on metered charges which bring in about two percent
of NSP's annual gross revenues. We are waiting for a further breakdown of 1Vlinnegasco's customers
before preparing equivalents for them.
It seems to me that at this time city staffneeds the following direction from the City Council:
Approval of our general approach. We are trying to achieve what is reasonably possible under
present conditions. Practically speaking, this means working toward a franchise fee which is
about two percent of gross revenues but based on a per meter charge.
2. Approval to continue negotiations with NSP and Minnegasco. The first step would be for staff
to negotiate terms of a franchise agreement with NSP. Before this goes to a public hearing we
would work out our communications/public relations strategy, possibly with help from a
consultant. Then the Council would hold the public hearing and pass the franchise ordinance
for NSP. Then staff would negotiate the terms of a franchise fee ordinance which would be
enacted at the same time for both utility companies. Finally, the Council would hold the public
hearing(s) and enact the two franchise fee ordinances.
A�
Memorandum to William W. Burns
Franchise Fees for Ga.s and Electrical Utilities
October 14, 1997
Page Four
3. Approval to contact other stakeholders, notably the Southern Anoka County Chamber of
Commerce. Staff feels that it is important to consult with them early on, to get their input, and
to communicate our concerns well in advance of any public hearings or legislative activity. I
don't think we will ever get their enthusiastic support, but we hope to get them to understand
the City's position and communicate it accurately to their members.
4. Designation of some of the principal uses of additional revenue from utility franchise fees. In
preparing our public information strategy we need to know the Council's maui priorities for the
additional revenue. Obviously, some or even most of the revenue will go into the General
Fund to help reduce our budgeted operating deficit. However, in making our case to the
citizens and customers of the utility companies we need to highlight some of the uses of the
additional revenue from franchise fees.
�
�
MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: October 16, 1997
TO: UWilliam Bums, City Manager��
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Update on Telecommunication Ordinance and Analysis
�:. .• � �•
Although it is premature to provide any update on the financial implications from the
telecommunication consultants, there has been a significant amount of work on the
draft of the ordinance regarding the site-specific approach (Option A). As you recall,
the City Council asked staff to proceed with drafting the telecommunication ordinance
based on the site-specific approach to permit wireless telecommunication facilities on
specific municipally-owned sites.
Since that time, Adrian Herbst and Tony Mendoza of Fredrikson & Byron were retained
to assist the City with the legal implications of both Option A(site-specific approach)
and Option B(establishing a utility). Adrian and Tony evaluated the ordinance I had
prepared and suggested several modifications and a modified approach.
Current Ap roach
The attorneys advised us that the site-specific approach that was reflected in the first
draft could not sustain a legal challenge since it created "exclusive" sites for one owner
which may offer an unfair competitive advantage. Instead, they proposed an "overlay
district" which would not only specifically designate municipally-owned sites as
permitted uses, but also additional privately-owned sites. The additional sites are as
follows:
�
�
Update on Telecommunication
Ordinance and Analysis
October 16, 1997 .
Page 2
• Onan Corporation
• Totino-Grace ballfields (light standards can be used for antenna
arrays)
• Agro-K site
• Vacant land at 615` Avenue and Main Street
• All-Temp storage on the south side of I-694
• United Defense/FMC water tower
• Right-of-way immediately south of I-694 near apartment
buildings
Originally, it was hoped that a hierarchy within the concept of "approved sites" could be
implemented whereby the providers would have to go to the municipally-owned sites
before locating on the privately-owned sites and prove why the municipally-owned sites
would not work. The industry objected to this approach, stating that if all the sites are
considered "permitted uses", there should be no distinction as to ownership. Herbst
and Mendoza agreed and suggested that there be no distinction and that the City
amend the draft ordinance. They also suggested that the overlay zone permit wireless
facilities as special uses in the industrially=zoned districts.
Staff was Feluctant to let go of the site-specific and the priority approach for City-owned
sites, but they attorney felt there was a legitimate legal claim. David Dolter, one of the
subcontractors from the Kreines & Kreines firm who specializes in the'operational
aspects of wireless communication facilities, stated that with six providers licensed for
the area, they will more than likely use the City's sites (especially the water towers}.
Planning Commission Action
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the ordinance (attached) and will
be considered by the City Council on October 27, 1997. The addition of the privately-
owned sites was made after the notice of the ordinance public hearing. In order for the
overlay zone to become effective for these sites, the City will have to complete, in
essence, a"rezoning application" for these sites to be considered approved sites. In
the meantime, the City can proceed with the ordinance draft with the municipally-owned
sites as approved.
The Totino-Grace ballfield site was selected because the operational consultant had
advised that the light posts would be excellent locations for small antennas or the new
micro-cell technology that is anticipated in the marketplace. The City Council ultimately
has final authority to determine whether a specific�site is considered an "approved site"
Update on Telecommunication
Ordinance and Analysis
October 16, 1997
Page 3
or permitted use. The ordinance also provides the City Council with the ability to add its
own "approved sites" or other privately-owned sites as it determines.
•� • :
Kreines and legal staff met the week of September 22nd to discuss the utility option.
Three forms of public ownership was discussed.
The first form of public ownership would be a public service corporation (Option B1).
The second option for public ownership is a telecommunication utility (62). The third
form is an economic development authority (B3). The legal staff is evaluating which
option provides the path of least resistance to accomplish the City's objectives.
Summar�[
Now that the legal issues around Option A have been substantially addressed, the legal
staff can spend more time on Option B. Kreines identified several issues with B1 and
B2 which will drive his business analysis. We expect to have answers in the next 2- 4
weeks.
.�
M-97-435
KREINES & KREINES INC. TEL�1-415-435-1522 Oct 07 97 5�10 No.001 P.Ol�`
Krelnes & Krelnes Phone 415,35-9214
A Calitornla Corp. Fax A15435-1522
'`
`'/
\
\ /
To: Barbara Dacy, AICP
rrom: Teci Kreines, AICP
Date: October 6,1997
Re: Comments on Hick�ck and HerUst Memos
S8 Pa�eo Mira�ot 1n our phone conversation t�day we agrced that I would cominent on where
Tiburon, CA 94920 the "utility" business plan was going and how we needed further input from
Fridley.
Track B1 versus Track B2
These may noi be so differeni, given the less than cnthusiastic endorsement
that Herbst gives a utility. lf a utility is out of the question, we need your
definitive direction tc> »� l�nger pursue Track B2 as characteri�ed Uy Hickock.
Hickock characterized Track B2 as ownulg assets, specifically towers, lockers,
antennas, etc. We no longer believe this is viable, since technology is changing
at such a pace that these items may become obsoleie or even unnecessary. <Thc��
utiliry or public service corporation will have one principal asset: the public-
land.s and rights-of-way. ,In that sense (asset investment) the Txacks (T37 vel•sus
B2) are siinilar.
The utility m2�y have regulatory and er►clusionary powers that the public: .:�
service corporation doesn'k That will be the importanfi distinction for us. ;
13ere are the questions for 1•ierbst:
• Can a carrier use its own equipment under the �ublic service corporatio�
but must use utility-designed (a»d perhaps sold) poles and cabinets (as
lon� as the public service corporation doesn't own them) under the utility?
• T�oes the utility llave �owers of eminent domain? Does the public service
corporation? Can either (or botlt) cvndemn land for an easement, or less
than full-fee ri�hts?
• Can the public service corporation �extend its powers over private land,:
ix�cluding roofs and parts of buildings?
. Can t�he public service corporaHon review be concurrent with City of
Fiidley review so tlle City is not accused of bureaucratic delays?
• Can a carrier go to "neutral" land, sucli as the NSl' easements, and escape
ihe public service cor�oration purview?
KREINES & KREINES INC. TEL�1-415-435-1522 Oct 07 97 5�10 No.001 P.02
Depending �n the answers to these -- and other -- questions, the utility
approach iray disappear as nothing more than a glorified public service
corporation approach.
The Uae of Wireline is Key to the BusineBe Plan
Our focus on asset ownership has distracted us from this point: Today, 90°� of
all wireIess calls end up nn wireline. The common practice in urban areas is t�o
"backhaul" wireless via the Local �xchange Carrier's (LEC's) lines. ln Fridley,
the L�C is US West, and m�st US West lines are in the public right-of-way.
lt may be that someday a wireless call can go from pole to pole but, for the
foreseeable future, all wireless calls must be switclled at some central point.
Invariably, the conduits earrying the switched signals are the LECs. This :
interconnection and usage costs money for which the LECs charge and to �
which the wireless companies are resistant and opposed:
Our belief is that the wireline connection, be it LEC's copper, another
Competitive Access Provider's fiber, the City of Fridley's newly installed �
hybrid fiber coaxial cable or Paragons' cable, should fa)1 under the purview ��
thc public service corparation or utility: There aze tw� geographies where this
UcGOines critical to the business plan:
•'1'he public rights-of-way, which aze statuatorily constrained by thc State of
Minnesvta, but for which there are management fees and powers reserved
to ihe City of Fridley.
• The path that lies between a carrier s site and the right-of-way, usually a�
trench on private property in today's conventional deployment. �
We need guidance frorn Herbst on ihe issue of whether the public service
corporatinn or the utility can:
• Charge for the one-time connection (not the use) of a wireless site to a
wirelinc (anybod�s) in the public right-of-way?
� Charge for the creation and/or the use of a city-owned easement for a
trench along privatc ]and Uetween an approved wireless site and its
corulection to thc puUlic right-of-way?
• Obtain by eminent domain (condemnafion) any leas-than-fee interest?
Assurning that affirmative answers are forthcoming on these three questions,
we can then create a re�ulatory scenari� that gives the public service
corporation or utility the kind of �ontrol it seeks.
2
KREINES & KREINES INC. TEL�1-415-435-1522
Regulatory Iesues
Oct 07 97 5�11 No.001 P.03'"
Although zoning offers broad powers of land use (and to some extent
environmental and infrastructvrc) rcgulation, there may be a need to go
beyond traditional police powers: �
Wc kn�w that a"black b�x;' as described in Appendix A, is coining that can
attach to a building wall as well as a right-of-way pole. This box must be
�utsidc the building because the technology is limited to the de�;ree it �oes
through walls. The first set of questions is:
• Can the City of Fridley keep the box off building walls as a safety issuc?
• Can the Ciiy restrict the box to only public lands and/or rights-c�f-way?
•� If the Uox must be permitted on private building walls, can the City requirc
a puUlic easement for backhaul purposes?
• 1f th� box is surreptitiously "windowed" hom inside a building tt� the air
outside, could the City still maintain control of the wireline connection?
7'hcre is an alternative method of backhaul connection that avoids wireIine:
use of microwave relay via two dishes.. This method requires absolutely clear
line-of-sight (no trees, leaves, etc.) and is usually preferred in rural lacations�
on high towers. Thc second set of questions is:
• Can the City prohibit microwave relays on any mounts (e.g., buildin�s,
roofs, poles, etc.)? For the record, thcse are not satellite dishes.
• Should the City of rridley consider owning the only microwave relays
permitted in the City?
• Can micr�wave be pesmitted in the right-c�f-way only (where it makes #hc
most sense because of clear space) so that building conncctions must be
made via wireline?
This leaves the wireline issue: can the City of Pridley r�gulate the cor►nection s
between a permitted site on private property and the right-of-way? lf
�ricrowave is no longer an issue, then some kind of overhead, underground or
at-grade coru�ection is necessazy. This is the third set �f questions:
Can this connection be refiulated by a public ser�vice corporation as well as
a utility?
• D�es the Ciiy of Fridley want to own the connection, ow�i tJie wireline, or
just create the easement, ovex• which the carrier runs its own line?
3
�REINES & KREINES INC. TEL�1-415-435-1522 Oct 07 97 5�12 No.001 P.04
� Can the City of Fridley charge just for usc of the casement?
This final questions raises the issue of user charbes. We believe, but do not �
know, that there are meters that rncasvre the frequency and c�uration of calls �
on wirelines. Can user charges reflect thiS use? Arc thesc data measured
already for backhaul? We have a suspicion that, when ��BC's provide "gross ,
receipts" data, they may not be inclusive of backhaul and/or interconn,ection;
charges. We leave these quesHons to Herbst and, if he is ta b�come involved,
the City Attorney, as well.
Conclusion
These aze our yuestiox�s to the City of Fridley. You can decide how best they
are to be answered, but until we get a clear se.nse of direction (public service
corporation versus utility) and these answers, we can't send David Dolterd
back to Fridley to finish his data collcction. �
I look forward to your call on Thursday (on Wednesday I'll be in Scottsdale).
�
10/15/97 WED 20:58 FeLY 612347T077 FREDRIRSON 8: BYRON
AN ORDINANCE A�'VDNG CHAPTER 205� OF THE CODE OF ORDNANCES BY
ENACTING A NEW ARTICLE , TO BE Ei�TTITLED "TELECONIlVILTTICATIONS
TOWERS AND FACILITIES".
V1TI�REAS, on February 8, 1996, Congress enacted the federal Telecommunications
Act of 1996, P.L. �To. 104-104, to deregulate the telecommunications industry, providing a more
competitive environmezlt for wired and wireless telecommunication services in the United States;
WH�REAS, a co�comitant effect of increased competition in the market for wireless
telecommunications services is an increased demand for antenna sites on Towers and other
Antenna Support Structures necessary for providing wireless service via existing and new
technoloo es;
WHER�AS, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 preserves the authority of the City to
regulate the placement, construction, and modification of Towers, Antenna Support Struetures,
and W'ueless Telecommunications Facilities, as hereinafter defined, in order to protect t�he health,
sa#'ety, and welfare of ehe public; an,d ��
WHEREAS, the City solicited industry comment regarding the Ordinance in order to
facilitate indt�stry input and suggestions concerning the proposed Ordinance and to work through
various alteinatives and possible revisions in order to best accommodate the needs of the City
and the industry.
NOW, TT�REFORE, BE IT ORDAINE.D BY TH$ COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FRIDLBY, MINNESOTA, AS rOLLOWS:
SEC?ION 1. That Chapter 205 of the Code of Ordinances of lhe City of Fridley, i�Iinnesota, be,
and hereby is, amended by eiiacting a new Article , to be entitled, numbered and read as
follows:
ARTICLE
TELECOMMUNYCATIONS TOWERS �L.ND FACILITIES
Section �38sr.> �OS•� 1 Purposes.
The generai purpose of this A.rticle is to .regulate the placement, construction, and
modification of Towers and Wireless Telecommunications Facilities in order to
protect thc health, safety, and welfare of the public, while at the same time not
tuireasonably interfering with� the development of the com�etitive wireless
telecoznmunications marketplaee in the City.
Specifically, the purposes of this Artiale are:
-1-
@Ioo2�
�
10/15i97 9YED 20:58 FA.i 812��577077 FREDRIRSON & BY'RON Q]003
(a) To protect residential areas and land uses from potential adverse impact of
Towers and Wireless Telecommtuiications Facilities;
(b) To nunimize adverse visual impact of Towers aad Wireless
Telecommunications Faciliries throetgh carefu.l desi�n, siting, landscapin„ and
innovative camoufla.ging techniques;
(c) To promote and encourage shared uselcollocation of Towers and existing
Anterula Support Structures as a primary option rather than construction of
additional sinole-use Towers in order to minimize the adverse visual impact of
Towers and Wireless Telecom.munications Facilities;
(d) To avoid potential damage to properry caused by Towers and Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities by ensuring that such struetures aze souadly and
cazefully desigaed, constructed, modified, maintained, located, and removed when
no longer used or deteimiaed to be structurally unsound;
(e) To ensure that Towers and Wireless Telecommunications Facilities a�•e
compatible with surroundin� land uses;
( fl To facilitate the provision oF wireless telecommunications services to the
residents and b��sinesses of the City in a streamlined, orderly, and efficient
fashion;
(g) To �urage the location of Towers in industrial and business districts,
rather than residential areas.
(h) To enhance the ability of providers of telecommunicarion services to
provide such service to the community quickly, effecrively, and efficiently.
(i) To identify specific sites within the City where Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities may be located.
Section : .� 205,. .�2 Definitions.
The following words, terms, aud phrases, when used in this Article, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this Sectioa, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
".4ntenna Support Structure" means any building or other structure thirty (30) feet in height or
taller other than a Tower which can be used for location of �reless Telecommvnications
Facilities.
"Applicant" means any Pcrson that applies for a Tower development permit.
-Z-
10/15/97 WED 20:59 F.�.Y 8123477077 FREDRIRSON & BYRON
"Application" means the process by which the Owner of a plot of land within the City submits a
request to develop, construct, build, modify, or erect a Tower upon such land. Application
includes all written documentation, verbal statements, and representatio��s, in whatever form or
forum, made by an Applicant to the G`ity concerning such a request.
"Approved Site" meaas a site which has been approved by the City Council as an eligible
location for placement of wireless eommunicarion facilities.
"City" means the City of Fridley, Minnesota.
"Electrical Engineer" means an Electrical Engineer licensed by the State of Minnesota.
"Existing Site" means a Tower or Antenna Support Structure for which a permit has not been
issued prior to the Effective Date, and which is not located on an Approved Site.
"Owner" means any Person with fee simple title to any Approved Site, Existing Site, or Wireless
Telecommunications �aciiity.
'Person" is any natural person, firm, partnership, BSSOC1St10Il, corporation, COIIIp3Tljl, Or 0?.�16I
legal entity, private or public, whether for profit or not for profit.
"Satellite Earth Stacion Antenna" is all equipment necessary for processino o� traffic received
from tenes�ial distributions prior to transmission via satellite and of traffic received from the
satellite prior to transfer of channels of commuaication to terrestrial distribution systems.
"SYate" means the State of Mi.nnesota.
"Srructural Engi�seer" means a structural engineer licensed by the State of Minnesota.
"Wireless Telecommunications Facilities" means any cables, wires, lines, wave guides, antezinas,
and any other equipment or facilities associated with the ttansmission or rECeption of
communieations (other than radio or television broadeast communications) which a Person seeks
to locate or have installed upon or near a Tower or Antenna Support Stcucture. However, the
term. Wireless Telecommunications Facilities shall not include:
(a) Any satellite earth starion antenna two meters in diameter or less which is
located in an area zoned industrial or commercial; or
(b) Any satellite earth station reception antenna one meter or less in diameter,
regardless of zoning category. �
"Tower" means a self-supporting lattice, guyed, or monopole structure constructcd fYOm grade
wluch supports Wireless Telecommunicatio�s Facilities. The term Tower shall not include
amateur radio operators' equipment, as licensed by the FCC.
-3-
�oo.�
10/15/97 VYED 20:59 F.�Y 612J477077 FREDRIRSON & B�'ROY [�ppg
Section <-: �05.�.3r Non-Conforming YJses.
(a) Existing Sites shall be considered a legal non-confomung use, unle�
otherwise nr�vided foc in this Cha�ter.
(b) Installation of additional Wireless Telecommunications Facilities beyond
those in existence on the Ef%ctive Date of this Ordinance on Existing Sites is
prohibited. Failure to comply with this provision will be considered a violation of
this Chapter and subject to the penalties described herein. Routine maintenance
of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities on Existing Sites �a�e�e�-- 'i�.s
�ermitted= exce�t that Existing Sites and any Wireiess Telecommnnications
Facili�ies installed on Existing Sites may not increase in size, heiQht. wei�,bt
or otherwise resttlt in a in�crease in the intensity of tbe non-con%rming uce.
(c) If any Wireless Telecommunications Facilities on an Existing Site aze
abandoned for a period of one year, such Existing Site shall lose its legal
nonconforminb status and shall be considered illebal nonconforming use. The
abandoned �Vireless Telecommunications I'acilities shall not be reestablished on
the site, and must be zemoved within twelve (12) znonths o£ cessation of
operations. If not removed, the City may remove the facility and assess the costs
of removal against the Owner(s).
Section� OZ S._�4 Wireless Telecommunications Use Districts
(a) Telecommunications Overlay Zone.
(1) A Telecommunications Overlay Zone (TO) is created a.nd s.hall apply to ail
land within the City. Within Zone T0, the construction of Towers and the
�nstallation, operation, ar�d maintenance of Wireless Telecommunicarions
Facilities shall be a permitted use on the Approved Sites identified on Appendix A
to this Ordinance, subject to the provisions of this Chapter. Additional Approved
Sites may be selected as pezmitted in the future by the C�ty Council, subject to the
provisions of this Chapter.
(2) All pzincipal, provisional, conditional, and accessory uses allovc�ed in eaeh
underlying primary zoning district arc permitted in the Telecommunications
O�verlay Zone, except that no Towers shall be constructed, and no Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities shall be placed on Towess or Ante�nna Support
Structures, except as provided. for in this Chapter. �
(b) S�ecial usec. The construction of?owers and the
installation, operation, and maintenance of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities shall
be a �sBecial use in Zoning Districts Ml, M2, M3, and M4, �nd an
abutting railroad ri;ht-of-�vay zones, subject to the City's norrrxal s ecial
10/15/97 WED 20:59 F:1.Y 812J477077 FREDRIKSON & BFRON
use approval procedures set forth in secrion of the Code. Sections 205.
Of the Code are hereby amended accordingly.
Section <---� 205.,_,�5 Devetopment of Approved Sites.
(a) The constuction oi Towers aad the installation, operation, and
maintenance of Wireless Telecommunicarions Facilities on non-Approved Sites
shall be considered a violarion of this ordinance and subject to the penalties as
provided for herein.
. - - -- - - -
�:...:s. .:��:,;:.;.��.�.:...t-..�-,��..�.:� �=r �.:�U= - = "
.
\Q��• -���=��i�o=�i���G�� ��-i=�titTn
� Priority for use of the Approved Sites for installation, maintenance and
operation of Wireless Telecommwnzcations Facilities will be given to the
�'ollowing eatities in descendino order:
(1) City of Fridley.
(2) Public safety agencies, including law enforcernent, fire, atid
ambulance services, wluclz aze not part of the City of Fridley a.nd private
entities with a public safety a�eement with the City of Fridley.
(;) Other governmental agencies, for uses which aze not related to
public safery.
(4) Entities providing licensed commercial w�zeless
telecommunication services including cellular, personal communicarion
services (PCS), specialized mobilized radio (SMR), enhanced specialized
mobiled radio (ESMR), pagino, and similar sezvices that are marketed to
the general public.
��e), Towers are exempt from the maximum height restrictions of the
districts where located. Towers shall be pesmitted to a hei�ht of �
�� one hundred twen -five (1251 feet.
�e}�,(,, Additional Approved Sites, other than those provided in Appendix
A to this Ordinance, shall be selected by the City Council based on tbe proposed
new site's compliance �rith the following requirements:
-5-
� ooa
10/15/97 {9ED 21:00 FA.Y 8123477077 FREDRIRSON 8 BYRON � 007
(1) Whether tlle proposed new site is capable of ��� �g�g
developed to sup�ort more than �a�e� two operating Wireless
Telecammunications ���i� Facilities compazable to the �e�e�a
others in wei,�ht, size, and surface area.
(2) Whether the proposed new site poses a risk of explosion, fire, or
other danger due to its proximity to volatile, flammable, explosive, or
hazardous materials such as LP gas, propane, oasoline, nat�iral gas, or
corrosive or other dangerous chemicals; and
(3) Whethex the proposed new site is necessary and that useable
Approved Sites are not located within a one-half (1/2) nule radius of the
proposed ne�v site; aad
(4) Whether all foreseeable telecommunications tises of the proposed
new site cauld comply with the setback requirements of the underlying
zoning district; and
(5) Whether a11 foreseeable tElecommunications uses of the proposed site
could comply with any separation and buffer requirements of the
underlying zoning dislrict;
(� Whether the proposed site is accessible to at least two (2) motor
vebicles;
(7) �«-�*�� if a��iicable, whether the proposed site has been
dcsiQned and certified by an Structural F,noineer fo be structurally sound
and, at min.imum, in conformance with the Buildi.ng and Electric Codes
adopted by the City, the National Electric Safety Code, and any other
standards and requiremeats outlined in this Article.
(8) ��x�� Tf a��licable� wlieth� the Approved Site complies with
all applicable Federal Aviation Adminisiration lighting and painting
regulations.
(9) Whether the proposed site ��� �� �*°,'*'� a°°�o•.� vvill further the
�f�y's objective that alI Towers Antenna S�pQrt Struc� re ��
Wireless Telecommunications x+'acilities be dessgned �o blensi�in,�o tl�e
snrronnding environment.
(10) Whether the proposed site has adequate open space to allow Wireless
Telecommunications Facilzties to be installed without detrimentally
i�npactino landscape, displacing parking, or impcdi.ng si�ht lines of a
current or future pri.nciple use.
�
10/15/97 PPED 21:00 FA.Y 812J�177077 FREDRIKSON & BYRON
(I1) Whether the proposed site adequately contributes to the City's overall
e:Ffort to adequately meet the needs of the wireless telecommunications
industry.
(12} Whether the proposed site has ameniries such as trees that wiIl allow
screenino and sight line relief. If no, whether the combination of site size
and other site features help to provide sight line telief.
(13) Whether there are othEr structures near the proposed site that can
serve as visual distractions such as high power transmission strucrures,
highway shori.ng, billboards.
(14) Whether there are natural topographic features that meet the height
requirements of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities without a tower
structure, or which allow for a lower overall height of any necessary
Tower.
(15) Whether there is adequate space on d1e proposed site so that the base
of any necessary Tower can accommodate essential equipment.
(1 � Whether the proposed site is outside of any underlying residential
zonir� districts.
(17) Whefher housed equipment caa be placed on top or on the side of a
structure that currently exists on the proposed site.
Sectioa� 2 5._.6 Application for Placement of Wireless '�elecommunications Facilities
in the City.
All Persons seelcing to install, operate and maintain W'ueless Telecommunicarions Facilities in
fhe City must file an Application with tbe City which shall include:
(1) The name, address, and telephone number of the Applicant; and
(2) Written, technical evidence from a Structural Engineer that the proposed Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities meet the slandaTds set forth of this Code; and
(3) Completed applicarion form for lease approval as provided by the City; and
(4) A report from a qualified and licensed professional engineer which describes the
height and design of the proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility including a
cross-section and elevation; and
(5) Site plan dtawn at an engineering scale showing the location of the Wireless
Telecommunicarions Facility in relation to surrounding structures; and
-7-
� oos�
10/15i97 WED 21:00 F.�1.Y 8123477077 FREDRIRSON & BYRON @J009
(� If located on a wat�r tower, a written report addressino the requirements contained
herein for water towers; and
(7) Foundation, cross-section, and building plans for installation of the Wireless
Telecommunications Facility; and
�g) -- - -
.�
. , , . . o
.�
� e �
e
�9}� An Application fee in the amount o£$500.00; and
�8}��, The Application shal.l also contain an affirmative statement indicating that
the Applicant a�rees to cornply with the provisions in Section of this Article
re�ardin,� abaxidomnent; and
.
, .
. j�) No new or existing
wireles� telecommunications service will interfere with pnblic safet,.X
�el�communicati�ns._ Before the introduction of new service or�sfore im�lemen ' Q
an chanQe i�ting ervice, all wireless telecommuni�ations service providers
shall notify the Ci at least ten (10l calendar days in advance of such changes and
allow the Citv to monitor interference levels during the testin� pr_ocess,
�----- --- - - -- �� - - - - -- - --- - -- - -- - -- - --
f��e���e ���-�a�-e���e�e�t��e������E�e��e-���CC�-�e'�
.
�
.
- - - - - - �;� -
.- - - -- -:-- - -
� � ..
.� - - - - -- - -- - - -- - -- - - -- -
. .
���f�J�l������1�1�1�iI�1������ ��
(�-?p.(]�,1 A building pennit from the City pursuant to Chapter , of the Code; and
-8-
10/15/97 WED 21:01 FrLi 6123477077 FREDRIKSON & BYRON
�121 A statement as to whether the �ronosed development o� Ap�roved Site ;s
�g�je of being develoned to su��ort more than twn n�erating W�rele�
Telecommunications Facititie comparable to the others in weight, size, and urface
area.
�}� All information submitted with an Application that is trade secret information vr is for
olher reasons proprietary.shall be clearly marked as such when submitted witIa an Application.
The Ciry shall not disclose publicly, or to any third party, proprietary information unless
compelled to do so by federal, State, or local law.
Section � ? 20_ 5.�_7 Application Process.
Upon submission of an Application, the City shall norify the Applicant in wri�ing to confirm if
the Application is complete addressing all of the requirements as required by this Chapter. If the
Applicalion is incomplete, the letter will specify what information is missing and the Applicant
must thcn submit a new Application. Upon submission of a complete Applicarion, cons'sderation
by the City Council of the Application for lease agreement will be scheduled no later than forty-
five (45) days from the date of submission. If the Wireless Telecom��n�cations Facilifiy is
located within a pazk, the Parks & Recreation Commission may review the Application and
provide a recommendation to the City Couneil prior to City Council action.
Section <-� OZ 5•,�,�, 8 Method of Detecnnining'Y'ower �eight.
Tower height shall be measured from the lowest adjoining grade to the highest point of
constnzction of any Wireless Telecommunications Faeilities.
Section �r----T �Q Exterior �nish.
Monopoles with antenna arrays shall be finished so as to be compatible with other buildings or
structures in the area, and shall be finished with a non-corrosive material. Wireless
Telecommuuications Faciliries placed on water towers shal� be finished with a non-corrosive
matcrial to match the color of the water tower.
Section � � ZOS. .10 Illumination.
Towers s.hall not be arfiificially illuminated except as required by the Federal Aviation
Administration ("FA.A"). Upon commencement o#'consttuction of a Tower, in cases where there
aze residential uses located within a distance of thrEe hundred (300) feet from the Tower, and
when required by federal law, dual mode lighhno shall be requested from the FAA.
Section �: : 205._.11 Landscaping.
�
@Ioio�
10/15/97 WED 21:01 F:LY 812��77077 FREDRIKSOY & BYRON � O11
AlI landscaping on Approved Sites shall be designed to screen the Tower, A.ntenna Support
Structure, and `Vireless Telecommunications Facilities to a hei�ht of at least six (6) feet from
grade and shall comply with all landscaping requirements of the underlyinb ZOIIIIIb district.
Section r----T 205._.]2 Security.
All Towers must be reasonably posted and secured to protect against trespass. Chain Iink fences
shall be used to protect Towers and Wireless Telecommunications Facilities. Barbed or razor
wire is prohibited anywhere on an Approved Site. All Approved Sites shall be designed to
discourage unauthoriied climbing on the s�uc�hue.
Section - .? 205�,:.13 Housed Wireless Telecommunications Facilities.
All Wireless Telecommunications Faciliries located on Approved Sites, which must be housed
on the Approved Site, must atilize existing buildings or structures, if possible. If no existing
structures are available, the Owner of the Wireless Telecommunicatioi�s Facilities may construct
such a structure..� u,,..,,,�,,,� ,,. �,,,. „�..,,�,,,.e...,,,�. �.� ,.�ae�:,�,� *„ �.tn
,
. Housed Wireless Telecommwoications Facilities, not utilizing existing builciings
or structures, shall, at minimum, �''� , � �� �,, °�-��_;�. � n��„'�� ° ����°�, . ., `.. �.t�e.
fuliv screened by existing structores, a brick decorative wall, or a solid one hundred percent
opaque non-deciduous vegetative enclosure, six feet in height at planfiing.
Section � .� 205._.14 Installation Requirements on Water Towers and in City.
Installation of Wireless Telecommunication Facilities on water towers will be pezmitted when
the City is fully satisfied that the followi.ng requirements are met:
(a) The VJireless Telecommunicarions Facility will not increase the risks of
contamination to the City's water supply.
(b) There is sufficient room on the structure and/or on the o ounds to accommodate
the Wireless Telecommunication facility.
(c) The presence of the Wireless Telecommunication Facility will not increase the
water tower or reservoir maintenance costs to the City.
(d) The presence of the Wireless Communication Facility will z�ot be hannful to the
health of work�rs maintaining the water tower or reservoir.
(e) All state and federal regulations pertainino to non-ionizing radiation and other
health hazards has been satisfied.
Section � .� 205.� Certifications and Inspections.
-10-
10/15/97 WED 21:01 FA.Y 812�477077 FREDRIKSON & BYRON
(a} All Approved Sites and Wireless Telecommunicarions Facilities shall be
��e� periodically reviewed by �^ �`-�•^~�L�°"��°°�� the Ci to be
suvcturally sound and in conformance with the requirements of the City buildi.ng
code, thic Cha�ter, any eonditions c►f a�roval �laeed on a s�ecial use �ermit
an.d all other construction standards set forth by the City's Code ��€'e�.ax�
�
L'� n4ie�e_Tntn n� ?T��e� fi+�a+w�+++nn All �v:nfi.+n C�:lnn e�r��ief �ile f�c� narhi_�wnfs
a
., and federal, state, and locat
law. Existing Sites may be inspected for compliance with this section at any time
if the City believes there aze questions regarding
��;n,��b e:�° � compliance with the C� bu�_ld�ng code. this cha�ter, any
conditions of aaproval �1_aced on a speciai use �ermit ai other construction
standardc set forth �g tlae C�,y's Code. and all other federal, state, anc� Iocal
laws.
(b) The City and its agents shall have authority to enter onto any Approved
Site or Existing Site, between the ins�ections and certifications required above, to
inspect t�ae site for the purpose of dete��ning whether the Sites comply with the
City's Building and Electric Codes, the National Electric Safety Code and all
othez coi�struction standards provided by the City's Code and federal and State
law.
(c) The City reserves the right to conduct such inspections at any time, upon
reasonable notice to the Owner(s). All expenses related to such inspecdons by the
City shall be bome by the site Owner(s).
Section �-T 205. .16 Maintenance.
(a) Ordinary aad reasonable care of Approved Sites a�id Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities shall be employed at all times. AIl Approved Sites
and Wireless Telccommunications Facilities shall at all times be kept and
maintained in good condition, order, and repair so that the same s.ha11 not menace
or endanger the life or pmperty of a�ay Person.
(b) Ovmers shall install and maintain Approved Sites and Wireless
Telecommunicatzons Facilities in substantial compliance with the requirements of
the National Electric Safery Code a�id alI FCC, State, and local regulations, and in
such m.anner that wili not interfere with the use of other property.
(c) All maintenance or constzuction on Approved Sites or Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities shall be perfonned by �eer�ee� al' e
maintenance and construction personnel.
-11-
� 017
~10/15/97 WED 21:02 F.�.Y 812J477077 FREDRIKSON & BYRON
(d) All Owners of Wireless Telecomintu�.ications Facilities shall maintain
compliauce with current rzdio frequency emission standards of the FCC. In order
to provide inforniarion to its citizens, copies of all FCC information concernin;
�Vireless Telecommunications Facilities located on Approved Sites shail be made
available to the City and updated annually. �
(e) In the event the use of an Approved Site is discontinued by the Owner of
the Wireless Telecomtnunications Facilities located on the Approved Site, or in
the event an Owner files notice of the FCC of its interest to cease operating, the
Owner shall provide written notice to the City of its intent to discontinue use and
the date when the use shall be discontinued.
Section << .� 205._.17 Stealth Design aud Exterior Finishes.
All Approved Sites and Wireless Telecommunications Facilities shall be designed to
blend into the surrounding environment.
Section � .� 205�18 Abandonment 4
{� If any Approved Sxte for which approval to install, maintain, and operate Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities has bee�z o anted by the City shall cease to be used for a period of
365 consecutive days, the City shall notify the Owner of the Approved Site or Wireless
Telecommunications FaciIities, with a copy to the Applicant, that such site has been deemed
abandoned. Upon a finding of abandonment by the City, the Approved Site or Wirelcss
Telecomrnunications T'acilities abandoned may be removed. The Citv shall assess all coctc
related to the removnl of abandox�ed Tower , .
r
o - ,
��g�q-�� tlsn C; tu i r� , r«� �, a s. a �. .�, rs. • c n •� a• n Fr � .L
` _ or Wireless
Telecommunications
� d �
°"' `"' °"°''`'° "PF � �es--� Facilities to the
�.��. �,�-n =e3sa� ���a-e� ��e�ess �'e�eee��sa#e�o ''
Owner s .
SECTION That if any clattse, section, or other part of this Ordinance shall be
held izzvalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this
Ordi.nance shall not be affected thereby, but shall remai.n in full force and effect.
SECTION That aIl Ordinances, or parts of Ordinances in confIict vcrith this Ordinance
be, and hereby are, repealed.
S�CTION That this Ordinance sl�all be in full force and effect from and after date of
passage.
-12-
C� O 1 J
10i15/97 WED 21:02 FA.Y 8123�377071 FREDRIKSON & BYRON
APPE�IDIX A
The following locations are zoned to and have been determined to be
r . Annroved Sites for the
installution of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Municipat Garage - Recycling Center
Community Park
Edgewater Park
Fridley Reservoir
Fridley Water Tower
Fridley Commons Water Tower
Well #13
Onan Corporation
AllTemp Storage
Agro-K
FMC Water Tower
Undeveloped property at 61s` and Main Street
Totino Grace High School
Undeveloped City ri�ht-of-way south of 694
All Persons using City-owned property must execute a s�te lease agreement wrth the City.
206284a� a
�}S�8}� tRf 7qm0I!.doe)
-13-
�01y
�
MEMOR.ANDUM
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: October 16, 1997
TO: ✓William Bums, City Manager �,r,���i
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator
Julie Jones, Planning Assistant/Recycling Coordinator
SUBJECT: Proposed Increase in SWAP (Recycling Service) Fee
BACKGROUND:
On July 28, 1997, the Fridley City Council discussed the proposed 1998 Solid Waste
Abatement Program (SWAP) budget. The total proposed cost for all SWAP funds was
$414,452. Total SWAP related revenues, which included a$2/quarter Recycling
Service fee increase on residential City utility bills, totaled $398,126. This left a gap of
$16,326, which was far less than the original projected gap of $113,874. The Clean Up
Days budget was eliminated, and, instead collection of appfiances, scrap metal, and
fluorescent lamps was added to the Recycling Center at no additional cost. Staff was
also directed to continue to seek ways to reduce costs at the Recycling Center.
Staff has solicited RFP's for the Recycling Center operations. Review of the proposals
show costs that are closely in line with staff's proposed 1998 budget, which was
originally based on two informal proposals the City received this past summer. A
recommendation is being prepared and reviewed by the EQE Commission at their
October 21 meeting. Both staff's and the commission's recommendations will be on the
October 27 Council agenda
MULTI-UNIT RECYCLING FEES:
Another SWAP budget-related issue recently arose that staff would like to bring to the
Council's attention for discussion. Staff received a request from a 34-unit apartment
complex to be added to the City multi-unit recycling program. Current City ordinance
allows the City to add apartment complexes over 12 units in size to the City program.
However, the ordinance does not clarify what fees can then be charged the customer.
Currentiy, multi-unit customers are charged the same $4/quarter rate as single-family
homes.
Waste Management is agreeable to adding this 34-unit complex to the City's program
for the current contract rate of $2.15/unit/month. This equals an annual expense of
$877.20. If the City were only to charge the complex owner the $4.00/quarter recycling
service fee that 1-13 unit cusfiomers pay, $544 in revenue would be generated, but the
City would lose $333.20 per year. If the SWAP fee is $6/quarter, $816 in revenueis
created with a loss of $61.20.
Adding large apartment complexes will drive costs up unless a fee is charged to offset
the City's expenses. If the City agrees to add large apartment buildings, a rate equal to
our costs should be charged.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council continue with plans to raise the SWAP fee on
City utility bills from $4/quarter to $6/quarter on single family houses and multiple
dwellings up to 12 units.
Regarding the over 12 unit building multi-unit charge, staff recommends that the City
Council amend ordinance 113.07 to clarify that the City would charge its current
contracted rate for this service to the owner. This can easily be done during the public
hearing process already in place for the October 27 Council meeting.
MEMORANDUM
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: October 17, 1997
TO: � William Burns, City Manager7�r�,�f�
FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Options for the Walgreens Redevelopment
The HRA and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of the Walgreens
proposal at the northeast corner of University Avenue and Mississippi Street. Denial of
the application is within the City Council's purview. The S-2 district provides the City
with complete flexibility to approve or disapprove specific prflject plans.
OPTIONS
If the City denies the Walgreens application, it is imperative to revisit the vision of this
site. The combination of neighborhood support for the Walgreens project and the
owner's frustration with redevelopment options has raised the issue: "What does the
City want?"
Options for the City Council to consider are:
1. Deny the application and see if the 1991 approved plan still materializes.
2. Deny the application and conduct a redevelopment analysis to determine the
new vision of the site and address the following issues:
a. What are the acceptable uses for the site?
b. How big should the site be?
c. How should the site interrelate with the other uses in Center City?
3. Take site control. Initiate negotiation to acquire the Swanson property and
the two single family homes immediately adjacent to the property.
Condemnation may be required. The HRA could either rent the existing
buildings or proceed with demolition. Staff recommends demolition.
�
Options for the Walgreens Redevelopment
October 17, 1997
Page 2
4. Complete planning process identified in #2 and go out for RFPs and award
development contract to a developer (new TIF district required, and FiRA
assistance needed).
5. Approve Walgreens' application, and expand project area east to incorporate
Walgreens with a larger redevelopment vision.
6. Approve the plan as presented.
ANALYSIS
Option #1 is not proactive, and assumes the original vision is appropriate. Option #2
needs to happen, and a process to include the neighborhood in the decision-making
process should also occur. Option #3 will be expensive if pursued now; the pending
purchase agreement with Swanson is probably in excess of $800,000 and may be as
high as $1,000,000. Total cost for acquisition, demolition, and relocation may be
$1,500,000 to $1,750,000 (commercial leases to expire at the end of this year). If the
City is serious about redeveloping this site, acquiring the site now may be prudent and
fair to the owner. Option #4 could produce a viable developer who would be willing to
take on redevelopment activities with assurance of HRA assistance, but the City needs
to define what it wants first. Options #5 and #6 assume the City wants the use as
proposed.
If redevelopment of this corner is a top priority for the Center City area, a full spectrum
of land use options should be prepared, and the City should initiate acquisition and
redevelopment efforts quickly. Walgreens' application has forced the City to react; now
the decision is to determine how important this effort is in relation to other priorities,
including Hyde Park, apartment rehabilitation, Riverview Heights, Fridley Executive
Center, and salvage yards (not to mention the telecommunications issue and the
Comprehensive Plan).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff suggests that the City pursue Options #2 and #3.
c�
M-97-434
c: Jim Casserly
CITY OF FRIDLEY PROJECT SUMMARY
Rezoning Request for Semper Development Ltd.; 6525 University Avenue N.E.
Agenda Item: Applicant: Semper Development Ltd.
Case Number: ZOA #97-07 Application Date:
Staff Reviewer: B. Dacy Meeting Date: October 15, 1997
City Manager Authorization
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
Semper Development Ltd., representing Walgreens, is requesting a revision to the
approved redevelopment plan for the northeast corner of the University Avenue and
Mississippi Street intersection. The petitioner is proposing a 13,905 square foot
Walgreens store with a prescription pick-up window.
� SUMMARY OF ISSUES:
The site plan meets the typical requirements of a commercial use; however, staff is
concerned that the proposal under-utilizes the area of the site, and is not maximizing the
I full potential for redevelopment at this location. The petitioner indicates that the
' prescription pick-up window is imperative to the success of the store, and they are not
willing to share the site with other users. The success of Christenson Crossing and the
revitalization of the area around the intersection necessitates additional review by the City
to determine the spectrum of opportunities for redevelopment at this location.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the proposed
rezoning of the redevelopment plan to the City Council. Should the Planning Commission
recommend approval, the following stipulations are recommended:
1. Compliance with the comments of the Engineering Department as stated in the
September 23, 1997 memo from Jon Haukaas.
2. The petitioner shall execute a stormwater pond maintenance agreement to maintain
the detention pond at the north side of the site.
3. A final landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted and approved by City staff
prior to issuance of a building permit.
4. The westerly right-in right-out driveway shall be removed from the site plan and shall
not be constructed. A permit for the easterly driveway must be obtained from Anoka
County.
5. The property owner shall agree to execute an easement to use parking spaces on the
site for a park-and-ride site.
Project Summary
ZOA #97-07, by Semper Development Ltd.
Page 2
Petition For:
Location of
Property:
Legal Description
of Property:
Size:
Topography:
Existing
Vegetation:
Existing
Zoning/Platting:
Availability
of Municipal
Utilities:
Vehicular
Access:
PROJECT DETAILS
A revision to an approved redevelopment plan in the
S-2, Redevelopment District
6525 University Avenue N.E.; NE corner of University
Avenue and Mississippi Street
Lots 9, 10, 11, 12, Block 2, Rice Creek Terrace Plat 1, and
Lots 13 - 16, Block 3, Rice Creek Terrace Plat' 2
Approximately 2.88 acres
Flat
Typical suburban; trees, sod, shrubs
S-2, Redevelopment District and platted lots
Services available
Mississippi Street and 66�' Avenue
Pedestrian There is a bikeway/walkway from the bus stop at the SW
Access: corner of the site, which travels along a westerly lot line to
66`h Avenue
Engineering
Issues:
Stormwater pond maintenance agreement
Comprehensive The parcel is part of the Center City Redevelopment Area
Planning Issues: and the 1990 land use plan identifies the area as a
"redevelopment district".
Public Hearing To be taken on October 15, 1997.
Comments:
Project Summary
ZOA #97-07, by Semper Development Ltd
Page 3
ADJACENT SITES:
WEST: Zoning: C-3, General Shopping Cntr Land Use: Holly Center
O T: Zoning: S-2, Redevelopment District Land Use: Offices
E_ A�S�:
NORTH:
Zoning: R-1, Single Fam. Dwelling
Zoning: R-1, Single Fam. Dwelling
Site Planning
Issues:
REQUEST
Land Use: Residential
Land Use: Residential
Semper Development Ltd., on behalf of Walgreens, is requesting that the City approve
a new redevelopment plan for the northeast corner of University Avenue and
Mississippi Street in the Center City redevelopment area. The S-2, Redevelopment
District requires plan approval for any project within an S-2 area. The project plan must
be approved by the Housing & Redevelopment Authority, the Planning Commission,
and ultimately the City Council.
SITE DESCRIPTION/HISTORY
The subject parcel now contains a 14,400 square foot retail building now occupied by
The Gym and Fridley Video. The project area to be developed also includes an existing
single family home in the southeast corner of the site. The parcel extends from the
Mississippi Street right-of-way north to the 66�' Avenue right-of-way.
The parcel has been the subject of a number of applications. To summarize:
• The property was originally platted in 1942 and 1950.
• The property has been zoned C-1 and R-1 since 1958.
• In 1962, an application was filed for a grocery store and retail facility. The Planning
Commission recommended denial, but there was no action by the City Council.
• In 1964, a rezoning request was filed again and the City began its planning process
for the Center City area.
• In 1965, the City approved construction of the now existing commercial building.
Project Summary
ZOA #97-07, by Semper Development Ltd.
Page 4
• In 1973, a rezoning application was filed for a proposed hardware store. The City
Council denied the rezoning request.
• In 1977, Red Owl vacated the building and since that time, a variety of uses have
occupied the building, including 10,000 Auto Parts, Slumberland outlet, carpet
remnant facility, Kokesh Motorcycles, and now The Gym and Fridley Video.
• In 1990, the City rezoned the property to S-2, Redevelopment District, based on a
plan which proposed a 28,230 square foot multi-tenant retail center.
• In 1991, an amendment to the plan was approved to permit a drive-through window
at the west end of the site; the size of the building was 27,745 square feet.
PROPOSAL:
Semper Development Ltd. Is proposing to construct a 13,905 square foot building on
behalf of Walgreens and will execute a lease with Walgreens. The building will have a
prescription pick-up window on the east side. The petitioner indicates that the
proposed building is a new prototype in the metropolitan area. The building will have
face brick on all four sides with a stucco finish at the roofline. A canopy feature at the
entrance to the building in the southwest corner will contain a large window feature.
The petitioners are proposing to complete the redevelopment activities. Semper
Development Ltd. will acquire the affected lots, relocate the affected owners/tenants,
and complete the demolition.
The project area is smaller than the original project area. It does not contain the single
family lot which abuts 66�' Avenue.
NEIGHBORHOOD CONTACTS:
The developer has initiated meetings with the abutting homeowners around the north
and east sides of the site. They have indicated that the neighbors would like the
following: �
• Increase the number of pine trees along 66`r' Avenue
• Place the fence on the south side of the detention pond area so that the fence is not
located along 66'h Avenue
• A small neighborhood center is preferred over a larger retail center
• Remove the ten parking spaces along the east lot line to create more of a buffer
against the single family home to the east
Project Summary
ZOA #97-07, by Semper Development Ltd.
Page 5 �
ANALYSIS:
The smaller project area and the requirement for a prescription drive-through pick-up
window on the east side of the building dictates that the building be located
approximately in the center of the project site. Further, the petitioners are requesting
an additional access closer to University Avenue than the originally-planned full
movement driveway at the east end of the site. The western-most driveway will act as
a right-in and a right-out because of the median which exists in Mississippi Street.
The location of the building in the center of the project area along with the "boot-
shaped" design of the parcel results in areas on the site that are under-used and less
e�cient than the site plan originally approved.
As a result, staff has the following concerns regarding the proposed plan revision:
1. The site plan and layout is a typical suburban cookie-cutter approach to an infill site
located in the City's "Center City area". The project would be more appropriate on
commercial properties further north on University Avenue (the southeast corner of
73`d and University Avenues, for example).
2. There is under-used space around the building. For example, as one drives into the
site at the easterly driveway, there is a large expanse of parking lot area. In
addition, the site does not include one of the lots originally rezoned to S-2,
Redevelopment District (the lot facing 66`f' Avenue).
3. The application raises concern about the ultimate vision for the corner of the
intersection. The traffic on University Avenue, along with the recently construction
by Rottlund at Christenson Crossing, is no doubt an attractive feature for a
commercial entity on the property. A mixed use project, either a commercial use or
a combination of residential and commercial uses, is more appropriate at this site.
In fact, the mixed use approach may cause the need to reevaluate the size of the
redevelopment project area.
4. Because this application has been filed, the City is forced to react to an application
when a process has not occurred to solidify the City's vision for the property. While
the application represents a valid interest on the part of the private market for
developing the site, the project is still a key part of the City's redevelopment effort.
The Planning Commission and the City Council are hampered by the fact that there
are not additional options available to compare against this proposal. In essence,
the City is being asked to react to an application and identify if it does not want this
type of use at the intersection. The City should initiate a process to finalize a
development vision for the site and take the appropriate steps to implement it.
Project Summary
ZOA #97-07, by Semper Development Ltd.
Page 6
SITE PLAN ISSUES:
The proposed western-most access on Mississippi Street is not recommended since it
would add an additional conflict to the function of the intersection, especially at peak
hour. Traffic existing the driveway trying to go south on University Avenue would have
to cross three lanes of traffic. Further, the driveway is simply too close to the
intersection. The City and the County have worked very closely together to maximize
the number of driveways and to maximize the distance between driveways along
Mississippi Street intersection area, stretching from Holly Center on the west to the
library on the east.
The petitioner has requested the removal of the ten parking spaces along the east lot
line and designate them as proof of parking so that an additional buffer area can be
created. Staff has no concerns about this request.
This site has historically been viewed as a park-and-ride for a light rail transit facility
along the east side of University Avenue. Even if LRT is not constructed in the
metropolitan area, the University Avenue corridor will be a likely candidate for some
form of alternative transportation (a bus way). Previous stipulations on the
redevelopment plan have included reservation of parking spaces to be used for LRT or
another transit facility. It is suggested that a stipulation be placed on the plan, if
approved, to require execution of an easement for reservation of the appropriate
number of parking spaces on the site when�such a facility is constructed.
The site plan indicates a 20 foot long parking space abutting the perimeter of the site.
The zoning code does permit an 18 foot depth of a parking stall when abutting a curb.
A reduction of two feet around the perimeter of the site could save a substantial amount
of parking area. A 25 foot wide access drive between parking aisles is proposed and
meets the City Code. ,
The Engineering Department has reviewed the grading and drainage plan and has
suggested comments, which are attached in a memo dated September 23, 1997. The
petitioner has already initiated the review process by the Rice Creek Watershed District.
A stormwater pond maintenance agreement will also be required.
HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACTION•
On October 9, 1997, the Housing & Rede�[elopment Authority recommended approval
of the plan to the City Council. The HRA felt that the plan was superior to the
previously-approved plan since it reduces the size of the building and consequently the
amount of traffic. Secondly, the exterior of the building is very attractive. Finally, while
Project Summary
ZOA #97-07, by Semper Development Ltd.
Page 7
the HRA felt that other uses could be evaluated on the site, they had difficulty in
recommending denial of the plan and preventing the property owner from developing
the property. �
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the proposed
plan revision to the City Council. The project is a key part of_the Center City
Redevelopment area. Given-the recent construction at Christenson Crossing, there
may be other opportunities available to the City to develop a mixed use development at
the property.
However, should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the plan revision,
the following stipulations are suggested:
1. Compliance with the comments of the Engineering Department as stated in the
September 23, 1997 memo from Jon Haukaas.
2. The petitioner shall execute a stormwater pond maintenance agreement to maintain
the detention pond at the north side of the site.
3. A final landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted and approved by City staff
prior to issuance of a building permit.
4. The westerly right-in right-out driveway shall be removed from the site plan and shall
not be constructed. A permit for the easterly driveway must be obtained from Anoka
County.
5. The property owner shall agree to execute an easement to use parking spaces on
the site for a park-and-ride site.
Extend Wall
�--�
r, -� � � -� �
\ _ � - _ - - - I - - -
-l0' GAS RAlN - - -�,, -' -
_.__-_-----__ b-H-� - 8' VCP SAN. SEVER ---I- --OMH
��������������.Z_ � � �� - _ _i�_� � -
OC
:.I.P. VA7ER MAIN --- -- i- W r
SSISSIPPI � N � STREET
� d I
u
�
. NQf E�
m
3EN0
EXISTiNG CURB 9 GUTTER
EXISTING CATCH BASIN
EXISTING MANHOLE
PROPOSED CURB 9 GUTTER
Pfi0PO5ED CATCH BASIN
AqL�L PARKgINGLLgLO�T� ,SyTyRIPPINgG7�I
ONE w4Y ARRbW54 FIC��IGNAGE�)
ETC. SHALL BE PAINTEO MR'i1�E
� PAIIVT H.C. SIM80LS AT EL�Cii FiC.
' STAI.L.
•urvn � a
I
/ �
N
�'
0
I HA�tI tNI,LU�UF
SEE SH. A3
[
EXISTING k '
SEE SH. NO �
FOR DEC.
SCREEN wa :
D�M. 9 DETC '
CNE-WAY
TRAFFK =
SIG� -
4
��J
o���
f+a
�3�lili
��
MAIN - - p�
SEVER - - � '
FQWAiN- e
2
S
� � ��
I � i !
�� I --- j � p,�e�
i
67 A1�E PE
B�!
I �;
f .�-:
��
���
`T�
S '�!
_ �
, � .' .....i
,��
SA7H1lTE LN NE
Zmirx,� Desig�ars:
0 I�1 - one Farriy units
� 1�2 - Two Family Units
0 F�3 - C�enerai Mltiple Urrts
0 R 4- Mcbile Home Parka
� � - �, u� a�,�,�
� s� - M^�e Park Nag�bornood
� sz - �aed�►,�,c asa�c
0 G1 - Local Busness
,� cz - c�,� a,�+�s
� G3 - C�'�I �ing
���,-�«��
0 n,�, - � �r,ds!►ial
� �z - F+�r i�a�,;�
� M-3 - outdoor Ute�sive Heavy �rxt
� � - ���
0 P - Rblic Facilibes
o ��
0 wc�r�-vwY
i ; ; i I m
� J '` � I
67 A
66 AVE PE
� r
'4 �
�_ /
�� � a ,�
�
�
`S__
V/
�
iC{J�1�AVEfE - -� �-
A11�E9 AVE IE
�1�
_ Z
�
a
G3 A�E PE
ZOA 97-07, Plan Amendment
Semper Development, on behalf
af Walgreen's, requests that the
master plan in the S-2
Redevelopment District be
amended to allow oonstruction
af a 13,000 square foot retail
facillty.
� '
v�i .
67 A1�E PE
63 AVE
�
N
A
2/�197
Grrpled arxi dr�n�n from official reoarls l��sed
0�1 O1�10e ND. 7� �ld Z0�11� �if�V�
d� �i2%/J� �lef INlitl � 2� Of�f�
arxes aclopted arxl effectiv�e as of ?!1 J'97.
The Qty aF Fridey t�as taken every effat bpr�-
vide the mosi up-io-dabe infiorme�6an avaihabl�
����r,�����.
,�a�� �a�,�� � � �e�
uiForesee�, erras ar us�ge af ws doamen�
..................................................................................... ...........................................................
^ O G�cl 1:: +� ��y illaE i � i
i; ? � �., Q ;:���; ,� �;f ° �;!„�,_ � , !, �
�3�: �;� E a ,���:� ;! 4�s` �� a';,'�� ', ;'•.t�„�:
�' ' ° ���!'I !�
��i� a �� U c� �����e �� ?� i��t�r�j!fiii' � f i e t
�� � ����'I�t �i� �itf ISi��1ii�� i� 333I i3 33
..........................................................................................
•:
N.; : ;� � r
� f W�� : ;�?I �� �s V
� Q�� . r::l .� E
� � � 3 r�:� ` �:� o��
E �: $t�a ' .__�
i i � t � .... i �3 ` ' !�
g . t
g �5 ��
S ' °°'
; p � � •--, .- , �;: .
[[ 4 ��',
g q 2�!� j §� �� s Y e�t p'1! -
q33yy � �
� 3 7� i i � � � � Y s t � a ! i� 8 � � � Y 4 � 3 � � � 0 6 . ; ��Yy e �'
a � : 1 � � � °3 $� e�e ��l� �
1 t �'�� � d � .� � ��� :.... � � '���
�: �3 . : �����#�� �� o�_� � � �� a'
. .
.: :
:
,: :
.._ . .
6
J :: - . ....... ¢
p �� :�::i,;�:.yi:::: .lµ}
�u y . . .IL'661 � Mi,>C,8Z.10S '
, , . . ; .. ..
. .. . . .
n9 .. i �. :..>o-. � ..i.. _ i:
. .:......,. ,........_. _ '
� _...., ......
� .....i � _— —_ I . O _ .-_... � ;'
xi� ,
• ............... .. .. ........ •
,. _ ... ............... ; 4 ;_
W .�
� 1�_
n n ....
m'
� .. oo .:� � � �--- -- — —
: o .. .
. �-
. �, . �
, : �
. ..... . . ......
. � , .— �
: � >: �� , ...
:. ....... .;. ...: � I . �.:
. ......
� ,06'64i : `�3,.iS.ZO,�ON ;
. .....:
�f � �— — — — — — �.. �,:"'"':,`�"""";.::,'+' _ ...,.,,
:�
•
:'• . I
3 I _ _ -- - — .
# _ .._
; �' . i ........
. : . :,,: ;... . , ..:.. : ;; ..,_:.,.
i _.._. � �, : � ..
;� . . . • . + ......
� �� � «� � - -- —
:. . . . .
: _ • — - -- • 'f
r. . I
�� �
....,,� . , h :
.. i
-- ' _' _ ..:..I �./
I . I •
� O
� �
_ �� � Z
;: •
` ` x
; = �:; .
. ... ........ ; i
�': �
.• �.: v1
< t;:
�' ' �
� ��:
� ........ . �..... r . , � ���
--.... .. .
� .... . . .. . t .
.� � M : .� �
: ' .. � ; 3 , i"
� :� .. ..:... .'.
: . . _ <
. .........
. . . ... 4.......... .
� . . i� N � r�.T--t� n0 't
:� � ,i ....... :. a : .... .. .... o ���-
;., ....... .
. ...::�.
: ' : ' � N •� �i i�:
� i
.. ... ... : :
� I
p "�� � �
�'.�`-, I I �. « O� N � i �0
: Q: �M� :a�, O � Z I .
W
'i � V1:. � $: '
� .:..
�0:; '�...; O : ,.: W ��• � . I
.. `_-� :
� � � � .`
;.
°� � I I O � �, ,: .. :.. W
... :
�O:s ........... � .... M 11 - ' e :
y ....... . . ... .....�. ._...... . .
)�: ............. «... ' � �� ' . I -.
;:� � � a_ ^ W . w
. :: :>, :xW , � :
� ' ' , . `
� �` :
� i � � .:::� .
. ....
o ... I � :
:� � _ : : ; ` �, - - -- --
. .....
._.
, �
., _ ; ; -- , _ ,
I -i
:� ...... • E � ��s
i ..: .
.• �
-� # . S
� '1 _.. �z " v �
; ... , :.: .............��_ .. .,:: �: �
� . ..: . ... ��w.- . ..... ��.... - - i � -
I ���
_;;
. . .�
. ; . . ;..: . , . , . : -- ;�.�;'� -- { $ ;
.
�O
� .........�--.... I � -, -- T- � � _. p�
. .............. . . � � .
. ......,,......._ .. p ,f ` � ..
�
� :#::
I I �� %} , �,;��' - #i .
I I . . . TO. _� � �$ � �
/ O e • . . �� �
�} .... .... � � � � � _ ' ......... _ ___ ,%, . . . . . -
_._ .�'�_� �� '�
t . . .. - • I —+ — — — — — — � � � . , � `.
..... .... ......
_... ..... • �p� — a
,. _
:, � ..... ... . � ; ' � � ' � ie :i�
: :
� .......... . . �% f� � . .sa T/1
, ..... ...... ... .. ... ::
,
> .�-- -----. _ ------- ' . ; . � :: NS
� — — - `---- � - '
— — — -- --- — • � E�
— — - ----
� tIE ' : ;s I ' `:
.� . � < � �
. �
. j:
;f ............... . M ....... . . �
�O Z 0
.. ....... ............... ��6b�1
� ....... . OS ... -
......... ........... ...
. ......... .............. '�..
� ... ........
... _.. ; .
...-_......�..._..._.._..._..._a .......�.v . ::
t .
I >r. 5
� . . . -._.�a---:„_..._.o.•-..+.._..... .......:............>._...:.�:.-::.-_......,;,,...,i. ' � ' . . � ¢
p µ ^
,� '�_'_'�'�'�__—___�__�'�_',�� ' . _ .�� '
. � _�' -
� . •. .... �-
. .. :�,..
• '• ..........:.:: . .. .: ^_
;...:
a'�� .
, �
. � :
:c"..�'::�x . ............ .""""'...... ..-........• . .. ^^..^..^^.^�....^,t'�«-^-•--^---.�.�...... '
.
....."'.._.."""" ...........:....:—.-""cv."'":........._..._........�.»........_"'......—r..1.w+s>»--M.^ya::c•rcav!r..:x.';• � :
'�'�I '��v' �ZIS2I�AIi�I11
....................................... ........................................................................
.........................................�.................................................................................................... .....................................................................................................................
� r' O W f t:' � ri r �'�� ( � � Z`�� ' ;� `f� �3 r' .
� j s � � G E1i��� �� �i `E� ��i� � � ;s� ' � a �! � � s W o :, _�: 3S4 � !h'
� � F !ii� � � � t� �t �';� � i �'•.l� �' �; � �� �: � � V �
� ��° t a;�.� -- a €�=C) �; ��� ���� � �)� � i�j� �t�j� �� ��� ' , ; , ��S } ? _ ' ; ' g �
I d �'i i ��.- G� Gc. �;�l� � ! ���t� ���.1 �;I:� ti:� 1� iii ; � � � t l��� {I �1 I � � I � � .''_ �J�� t ;+� ���
I j � � � �F��iji ��! i�� {. . ° �� c t! � i�i � � � • ' '` i� �t a ;� �' I
� �� vL` :Ere ` 1 j •t�� •� � � aD3i i5 33 i S � � i .... 3i�` �S �� �
: F ��';7 :; ` •
9
; y :�€; ; �:� �Q�
� 9��������;��:�a��E3�����n
s
1 I � �
.
..,
�. ., .
�r c=. ;:: ll�klr:�:.�=�o.:
�
�9 ... .. . .. " .. . ' ,IC
,
. ,
• .... ....... .... _ . " ,
W
� n_
nn
� � o0
o �i; �'° !
. ° �; : a . ' : ucOi
2.. z ._. : � . � -
� E li3� ... .
,f ; _. : ... .,� � .
{ .... .l . . .. : y ..Y . }
# .c6:sp� � 3 �s Zo�,loN �_�
/
; >• : ,
:: - - 3::
; . �
} .� �. .
:_
: � V; . .;�'� � .... .. �:
i��s
. _ ���� ..��
� ; ; . .. .. .... . : .:
-�. :.
� ,�_._:.
3 � s �t� ; - _
. +
�
a Y
' I
_ ::::� i
�. `. .` ,N: 7� BZ 10S „ • .
- _ ._-_ .._. .. _ �. � I.
. � � } ft. - . .. .. .. "I � _
_ / �..• i
` . . : 3' I •
i O
` 9 t
i :? ; .�.
��#.a: � .. ��� � �
'�i. �� ... -�� k = � �
> } � �� .
{
. ...>.'m.. y �� ... 'J t �:
�t� t s � S �
.��.. gqaa _ :i � .
•% -..�;,.,: ^�, . ; �
_ . . � ;: .
�.� �. 4 : V
� <
.� � . . � - .� �
� .
, .... . . : ; � �
�
�;; �
_ __ . . ..
�'�'�, ---�----- � '��
� :.. Mn[
�wX! . I � S
:�' . .�r�� ! � . fi '. _ � - � £ ...� 3 � 3 y
� .` :{� � ... .�.:......... _ � � n°o
: : # . ��� .�:. �N ....... _ � m0 I +�?'
... :...
.. .
: r ...
SJ :: ..
. � �.:
. .: :�.
. ; :. _ �� ,i:, i :, o • g no� � .; :
: :; •. :, .
. . : , ,; :..
...' �.
� �
! « o : M N . . _y.
� . � Z I `^
. ; W ��� � � � `} E"'�
W- ' . N.:. � �3� •'�� ? .. .`�j
NO.:.: ... '�O � ^� - : 3 � i 5
. iv�, I . O'�� N c'x - � � � . �r
: . ' .
, O n :: : . ... . .. ... . � . .. .. � M II � �
. .. . ... .. .. . .. .
. 'r .,: I
� « � . :. :..
: ' : � a - �, 3
. :
��
� y �# a: �' ::. . x� � � � ' �
. !
.
. . . .....
.
. .. : .
. . ... ,
. ; ' . s M..
-
.. �+.b. . ....
- ... ^ ..... �..::.... - ... -� '�.
. �
,
' .: � � . � ._ ...... . � i
.
:t ., I �' W
. i
��, -. i� . ..:�: � .: _ --- � :�:
: :; ... �.
: :: ..: ��.:..... � - ' ` I
: < _ � s� �:�.: � �1 �. . �' : : .
: ; _ . .. , � ..:.. ............ _ '
. .........
�
: : �; � ;:. �z — � _ i , f� � �
� :: ... .. ... . . . .. �....... : _ � i� .� �>Q�
� F�-- : �-----� -- , -� '� > ►--1
� l •.
. .. . ...��� . .. . �� .... . �� � ., j�y�y,�' _ i. . ^
r' I
E� ` � �J .. . # I ' x �
.y : � � :
'> � �..�.,, � . . `,� � `�,`' �
: :� ,..�:..;,:..... _
. ., :•
. . --- ��F
E E . ....... — - . . . .
.. ,. ..
. : . .::' ��
Y..
• > . ..... �
. . ... ., ,:_.
: . .... ; .:
. ' . ''�.:
. : � :,
. :.t
. ,
. :. ......... .,t
p �i . , # `.;
: , — --�- =-.; .... _. . '•
E �
... � .: ,
, ; p . � . . ` � .. . '' : { r/�
� N�
: ,.
- �-- - --- -- - ----- �� � I :� �
: ;:- :.
; :, • . ,� .�, ,� ,� � . ���; � .� �. �.,,. �. .� �. :;.
. ., ..
; :. .. : �� �
. :�. �:.: ........ ..... :$ �
.....
. < :::_ .. ..._. .
..
. :� .:;;;..:>_ �_.�.�......< � � f
. . ...,..�.._.._.:._..._ V.. _ .. ti
.........
. ; ....:. _ �.�_ .
....
. . . ,. .A.: ...... . _...
.. M ..4....�
�,. � 1�:
..-�:' � �
: ��:<.::.: -,''; . _ - , • ._. � '
, 3 ,: •.;:. ..:.: w� , < <
�•: � ... :
. . .: ���:
,, ,
: : :<::. ` .. -
>;_ �
.>:• -:
. -
. .:_ -:;... .. ...
- — - — - •. ,...--,� ���
--: �
• � —_--- ....,:. ...: : `
; �;_ .--�:
: ::::• . -------=-��— ---- - ---
--- •
. . .... .......... ...... .. ..
. ...-
.. •. �
: .. .. .. . . .. ........_ _.
. ... - `�r_, '
_: ........ . ..
. .... �.,,,..w.�...,�.. ,,,.r..�..... • : ...
_,
...............� ,..,..,., --r:•_.-.::.:::<�.>-•-.._..----..:..�,:. ..,,-.........._._,�...:.,.,.,,.,�w...,..„
• --•• .......................�_..__...�::.�,:.:y:...,,.:<.,..... -..�..� .�..........
, ............... ..................>_-.:,,.�,,...._
�
.�.� . I
. �� �,LIS2I�All�Il1 .
:.......... . ...
� � � � � �FI�OI.T.�i�1� �It����,[�.�� � i � �i
` � I �
,��� � �< �
���� ��� s 2 > � � � � �wv •na,�w, �s ra�s� iv an�.r,u.+s�n�+n � t ' `�
,i�� ?� �� � I .
� �' �
,c' . ;i � `�� ��I �' � T;�)) ;1'� .r�?`s a: � i i '
- _.� � ��� � �
�
���� :y
_7't- ��
;��6�,l�
� 9 �
$�2��1��
3 ao���a _. �
i.
�
�
z
°w
i.
�
;
���� �
����i�����
4
§
0
. ____________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ _ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________
� Gz+ Y� � tAia ;i .���r,
: t -'� �a i W e ���� 3�� tr;
3 }� A !!7 y��g ��;� - �� J,
1�,;; �� U� ;,'�:��� j � �s3' _;;� 4; �
. . � ,, �+. -�- �
� _ �� � ,!!! �� 11 � : �� • ;,.I �:��
�� .- � �
� � 3 5 �< a . ._; .
. � � � f � � 3i33 ie 33 ! 5 y3�L }I � t � j .
. �
I � ' s
il t It 1 1 j J t t �
i i t i i :: i � i. : i e � .
ii� � � . ...
, I
���iils � i ��1 �! � . € . . .
t � „� y:Y -
, ;,, •.9� i
t i �f �; � � 1 � ,y ...... ��. : � , � �° �
1 sa I I� tE �� � �"� :�" �°
..... ; �� _ r�
o � ; ;,�.
_, :;<::
I�•.-.......„ �� " �� -.; _
.
::, t
:��: :
�_ : �
.. _ _... � �
;
: ;
;........ ............. � ............ ��:: ... ...
_ _.... .......:�: ; :
..:
. . ........ : : : ; ,
.Y � :�::..I �
. � .. . ..... ;
� o .. : > ,
� ........ �e �� •
�� ::..... ..... ::�.:_: ... �: �-...... ::� I O
. ...: :.:
, : :
_ ..:... f
. ^ ' 3� ` : " ........
. � ; . . � : . '-,,..
: _ M1 .....: u. ` '�. .' ....
,� ; _ . . .
..`. �.:� ` � � �
, .
: � ..... � � . :o:_.. ... .....
. : =. . . -.. _:._ .. •
r+ �
;3 ; �z _: : ... i
, . � '
, , og
'V
: � .:-. . .. . , �: :: .. ..,....; . .: .?�.:;.. i r.�.. i .
: �: �
r,
�'� ;
�; . :. . . � ... . . . . . � : . ' �
. ., .�
.. . . .. .... : . � �� � �
.: ! . . ..�,�,......�.., ...,,.
........ �. . " �
.... '
� � O Q O ...
: .. ...;.
. ::. :
. ... �,y,c�„ .._ . ::
�
,:;
. :..
,>_.. .__ .......... .
�. �
. ��,,.:: ..... " ...
. __. : : ,
. ,. ,. .. _..;::
�_� �
.� .," �_ : . .
, Y .. R .
. ;. .
gk... a .
. :. ...
` ..t :' : x ti
:
e
;� q . > r�
;..
. :
.� e � .. 4 ..- .... �.:
` V
L� # i:;
�' —'v ° � � � � i-
. o � .. .;:. i c ... ,
�::: ........:....
� Y g_ : :.::; : .. ..::......:. ..._ �;
:. :� • GS�� :; .............::..
s o : y : ..:.. .:........... .:. ........
r:.
� > p . , ; , . .; ; ,y,.,.: ...
: ::
. .. ... ... .. ......... • . � .;.:. . .......
. .. ..: ....... � . .. # ;
. ., . ...... .
: % � . I?13
. : . .: .. ., „
i i`'• .�i S '•i :. -� • : `:: -.
� .:. ... .
..
';; . ,: .
. . _.. ., .,:'- . ': . ' � •�
;: :
< ...... ' -...? ;� ;'� � . ... _... , .
, ...,E .
...... W �
N . ...
:: E...
.k . :. .: . � N ... ... �} pg
� I
. . �. . ��:: :s:; .
i .. : O
. . .. . : O�y) .......:.� . �.. �}?.
: , .,. � .: � ::. •'t �.... . � .... , ?
.j .. Q N . :. :.
�... ;: « W . �I . -.. . . ..:......... ... : �;
:{ ' . � .
:� ::
.. �:n �-� ...... � i 5}:F-, .
;� .. .. _ ........... `� . a - ....... ..
� . m .
. .. . `
:: o.dJ �n i� .:.. ..... ..
, . . ........ > �
...
........ . n
. : �.....a. .
�� X� ...... � ? � �� w
� : : ��� � � �
. . ;c' ...... :�:•
;} : i i . �� M .............y... . .
.
.i�..
.y
•....
� : . ... � .i:.... .. . ....
9
y. .... '• � -: -O. ...... ::
. . _. . : ........
: ' • ' �
� . ; . . +
...
.........:. . . ;..
;� . ...... I � �
; ' : .�. : :.i... S : . . ........
� :. ,
� :.; : .
. ;:. .:...... ......... : .
.:
%e-- .: �...:" � _
n-_ . 5 �'� ........
: t z : . ;:}. : .:
� .•.::':
: _ _ ::.......... : + : : . . '• .
•i: :: ...
. ..... .
. .. :..:....
:.;.;.:; n
.: . :.y::
y � >
, , ; .� : : ; . .., ............... � :::;�`++'•''.;.
.S}4;' I :Gv
. . . .....:...n }
. ��
_ : . .
.. .
� .::.j...
: .... . . . . . ...
...
:} .. ... ... .... � .... . ' . � I $
.
. . . ........ _..} . ..� . . . . .
.. _� : k a
.� ....... . � . . .. . ::: �a g �_.. � _ � :�.� a�
-4 � � ;��
� �..::::. �� :��� �° .. �
:.... � �:
: > ... . .:: . o. �_ ...;
9 . �
, . : . . � .
. . . . ..,,-. ...: . .
z.
:v.:�: :...:.. . � . . s > �
� ��� �
�I� �.M,
` ���.
� •..+L.� ..q_'..��i--•--- �
;Q� „-�----� _._,.—..�.,• :_......� w.w.�.. ;<�.... � : Q � �t;
.� -j� ^ �:. ' _ Q
K . '.� .., -. . �
J�`' _����������������������� ....���.� ����� '
M19::•:z<ti:C:6tf]CT.}h5O>.ls1:::'M>i:.0.'•��^CYSi`K:•.Y�+AY^?'n»".:nvV.tt:t^...'•^ti^......�^^�i�^^^^....__.?.�"^b'X•:r.v.�.>\Y:�:•:v.v..........'^O.�J:::?'rt9s'y� 1 .
'�'i�I '�A�' �ZIS2I�ll�I11
.-----..---.
� ;.
° [s" �" !� � � � I� ��}+_ + ��e
� i
� � �� �.,q !�ll�� i �;�1�ti�tfi;� �,� a � W o
i � — �- � �_�� ��� ��;��; �t ��,� ����+���•_; .a,,3:�� i � � � ��_
�ji �� .. x �1�, , ft,� � I �� ,�,: { 1 , . ' , ;`iy� ..p]� ::
1 �e�; �' — "`` ��9�','���;���f'�j'���;�����=��i���� � �����8�� : � `��! ��..:
� �;f !, � :i C•:
^.•' i� � Aii�ii � f�f f�il� d ii !9� ��� �� li� �� 1��i ii �� 3i3i �� 33 7� i ��i�L
� � ... d
ii; 3� �it �
;;: a �� �
�:� y s
�i �7�
3�•
. i
i '� f '�f � �� = .
� t: �i���i� ������s�':le�iY a Y �
.:
�{ c1�>t�;3#�����$����f4� �
�t ..... :' $' �I }�� f�� l�' I' 1 FI I I I f I I j
i ` � ,'�,*l.:Jl�l�ldlil'lili:JIII� ,..'���
/ � .r
� i �� � � •
.....: ...... . . � f
. ,, �
�\ s t � ..:.,:: : ..:•: • '`
. .. .
E , G .
i • '
r �. .�... ... � 2 : :
� � � .. .. .......... �. • ....... . i � � , , ... . . . .
. :+ :
n � , ,,, . • . ' .... .... ..
, :..,. . ..
b , ;� - . : :. . .... �
� � .,. ..._ . .
� ... . . . .. ....... ...... ;.
. ...
..: ':�
: '•.. � : ; ; .. ... . ..... ...
....
..... ......: .
:.::
� ...... ... .,+ : >
; ;_.: s
. . I; ' O
.
` � � ' �° ..... ........
: .. ............... i � � � >' . .......
e� ' .._ .....:.::.:......
� .;:.. ,. .:;:, �.
� ;:
� . , :?:
': , `' ., :. :.
�� . �
....... ;.., .: .
. ....
., •.::
e ;
. ............ ;........ :
, , ' . , ; .:; �j 3 ......... E; �.':
. :i. ........ _ ' .......
i < ' •E ....---' : : ........ }g � � � .
; :. � . � !f : ;.
?
: :.
E: :. � i E �
: :. � .: ;:,:::: :.::.:.;:;:: � : _ .
,.: ..
. � . : ..
... �
.: ;�,_•�
��
: ::::.;,..,.,.....�£� ...... ' �r� �°rb 1�
, . .... .. .
. : ... . ..,.� g� : � �
: _ ...... � ,o
�.
: , < c, � <
�3 : 3j�y .�:� � ,>--•� ,�,,.-'# .
�
. . • �:
•
.. ,.._..._.,.,
,. ...
i ..
:: g •.. . .. r ...... � � 2
: : y,� :: �.�� ;: ..: � ! ���
:` .'. ;�
: � € .. :;...:�:�; .
:,. .
, - .... ...... �;;. ...
� ..
_. ...... ..:.............:.�.. ... �!i
................ � ��
; .� .,�..�.=.._ ........ :.
.. s� _ .., ; .
., . . .;:. : :: :
: /:; �\ t�, .......
�. :� ����� ..:.:... : ;; ---.....
� :: C�.,, ';;,: ..., ... ..�............ .��:
' �' ii : ' : :; ` .:... . N . . .... . ............... ."' �' 3�'.
:1.i � :� • : 1(1 . ........
� : tf: :: :... � ; � � � ......
e 9 e '�
' �� � j! . `_� ~ � . � M � ... T� � 1t� .YI . ..� C�'
� : �:s e� � ; � ; � pa � aD �R� ' _ •��
: � � � \ ' ! �te . O M II ..... �3�" �� �
� , s (��
. ........... ..... .......� .... ..... «
8. �2 � w
. a W � ; _ !�1
=--�.- ... �� �ti: ^ � .... , �
` �/ . �' � x `` . . _ . . .�..� .... .
. � �
� 3�: �' ,, .
: � : ...� 3�.� : _ ��.��
..:: � .
: . . ...: . :: ..: r.
.:..�..:. � :
, , .:... ..: .s. . , .
: � ::................. ...,:: ; � ...
: . . . �-/�
: ....-. -
���� � �: . � .
. .
. 3r� >.......... . ............. . ............. :z
5�A . �........... ,....., ..................... .... .. x � ,�: � vl
,,, : _ , , � �..: ..•. ,.
: : .� ::........ :. � a
:: � :: �, ::.: . :. ��-
.....
::
.,.
�..
... .
_ . :: .::
.::
. ............ ; ::: . :
^�p
; ....:��^ . ................. ....:; .............. .. :. : ' . ' .n %. Y 1
. . ' ' .:.: . .. �
. ...... � .. : ::. :,; : '
....... .l4
7
�t1� .• �
....... � � . . ::::.i� • I '. �
.. ...
i i. ��. : �� . .
. .i i� : Y7 .. i ; . �
: ': l . : �. �? .
a�; ; •i4 �� ;':> .... .. .
. .. .. _ : � u
... ..... .... . ` ; ` `
, � ..... ,,_ . � • . • : ; F . . i
.�� ^
:g: 9 _; ` . .... O
�� ►�: .. _.. ... ...... ... ......... .. ......... ...,. I :�:'� �
��.: � i� � � :. ,
: .... ... .:� � .... .. .
...
. ..... ...... . . �
. ... ...
...
: .................. .........
: . .:
... : ;: ::
. ... . �;
., ........:........:.. ..... ,....................: � �� .
::. .
:............. .. . ¢� :
. ,
.... �
.:.
..... . ... ...................................::. ...................... : :..............�...............:.::-. :
_ _ � : ....... :: .::::::. . . ..
.......................... ::. ............... .. ,
. . . �
� i�I ��' �ZIS2I�AI1�II1
............................ ........................................................... .....................................................................................................................................................:
. , ........ .. . .. . .... ......................................................................................................................................
EC-, �' �+ ! i t�— e ; (A ! � , •
f OW ;, � j! � � � 'f ���;�
i_ � � � A � Fl�i�� i j � � Z � ;�. S�� �t r
��:i ias�,�' � E LL' ' j i���:) i ��}� �;l; 1 �W�� . Ie� '� �i
i �
l � � °Q'�' � V �' ' E���l1 ' �1�� i; �� ; ; ..v3 ;': g
d ?i� fi � � i � �F ���i � ..��. � i !I !i ` ��s � , ;�s `7_`�
y. ,� � 1 u �`�a _ ��, o.[�
'. vL a:s: I 333i :: i3 ! � I ' 63a� j� �
A�
�3
¢i � ; � ����� ,
�s���} �gE a �����.��������"�
4A1�i�e5? #ii$!i :��
1 'Illl1
• ..�Iei.t�a•ap•I�i I 'I
� ��
a
$
a
°� �° ' q i ¢3 sg3'd ,�_'
� � ;5 �i ��� ! i 9ii��€���fg� '1� -5�
� � ±g � ) � � : : �_,��:,°¢= t�� ��
� ! ?i j !! s `� g�g � t4 i`��` �6�4l9� �9� g��
3 � �? �F ��jA 9 !; ¢=f � ; ���6�•Y�'•3� �`e ���
� � r �-� �� J �? � d d�+'p°�� _�� a � :t
�� � �. �� � �_ �� �:� p 7 dil���4a4�3 � ���8 �
�!g 5 �9 . i' � r i�
�{f � �� a � s`R �� �� ��3 9 � ���������q��d p� ;!E Fi� i��
p_ � � � f 1 v s
d i� �� a es } � 5 ;S �! iEa3�Ei 7 � §� �
�� ���� i � �!� ��i �� !� 85� 4� � ���+l� �e�S.�t � 'g ��� i:'
y� gy S: 's.i ��7 E�� 3 y � �
7! ia�i Y �! F=6 *7� �� E: �!� 5� 4 38 l.t��i�x:�l�t9 ai :i� !i! � f
�
. . ;�
..... .. � i�e =_ ....
: . � :.:. :
y . ,.� ... . : : ,,.: :•
s . : ' i': : �sr.i��,1x .
�['!61 �
.. . ...
�.::.i . . ; �• _ .. . -
T��ti-n : _.. ...._:�...%�"�..-, ,
+.::.j . : ; `%Y.:•�v.
:..
;:: ;
.: . . . ............ ....... : � . ...
. ..........:.:.. . .
� 'Z . ,.�,- ... �� i _
. �� � � r`-;
. # � ..... : ..
�a
::x _ . � `
... : =- � � _-
i p$ ;�, � ry ��� �: . \:;.
� { -...,. .. . _ s . ... ..� - S _ '
:S � .06•6N'' .jM..«• .......i. 7 IS _ : � `C .v.
..,� � - .ZOLAn \ ' -.' � . �' ..
_:. - .
. . � :..:.... .:>-
.
: � � :�' :, ... : . :-.w.`.°, w.�„�,.�.�,..� , _ �.
,,.. . ' ..�� ..
. �,��: .
_ 3I�
- ;� i.
!4�
�� �:.
� �:.' ��:'..� ��i/
� � �z°
� �.... u�i•^
..� �,�., - �,. > .,.<.,..: : � �
:� +' . . . ... 44� � Y - � �
W� �� � .... ....... z
• � ;` ¢� �� i » . � #{ V
� . �'' "�. _ ..... �� a;
: • � .. : � _
»
........:.:.
� ..... ..........::...:�
�
: �. ..� .-�
: � <;%: ..: ..: � :. ���. I
: � . .. : .. �. .
: � . .5 : � ; . ., ,. , ........ �� ......... : Aa
:'. :
' : :. < ....... :.: ... .. ' �g
�
.l
: � � .. �i. { ' ... ' ! a ' ' i K _
: �' �{ / �
: ��\ • ' > rv6y: +a ; b
:...
, �/ � _ � .. ... ... .. � � / ......
�:
:.
.:
.;.
...? • S
: o . .. ... .......: ...... . S.r ...... � ;I
: � . . ■p : ... ..
�/� ■ .5%� � �• ' ..
W/ �. � ;1i. { . S' �
• �3 ' �f! � � . ! :..... " � , .. �• �'
i ' � .. •: ' . - - � -
# �. . _
? : `., � � : ,.�+ ::. � ... ..�� . �. _ ............. ... .y� ..-., . .
....;
. � � 6 . - � � . . �
.
...
. i:;
' � ' • � �'
•�...... •
. • : • ... :: •... ....... s
� v :s ............... ................__. ..rn :
E..�:
Z ..
.>. : �' : , :
;..;.. • - - - :
<���< : ;a - , _ ... _ .
F3,.; ; ` _� � :i
�" � , � _ .....
.. :�..: ... ...
:: �� � ...�,.: _ .: .: � 3 .
:: � � s:..__. .. '
. : .
. � . : .�.m.. ..
� � r� � y�.�.. ���
. 7
.............................. v . •r 9- • 0'OS
� ' 2
...........� . `�.-......... .... " ..... � � ' C ~ • . ..
::.......... . ..' .:... ......... -..x.. a -.� M�61 ii 005
. . , .. .... �- . . ...
..vw .i• •-'�rr's-�-...-..,-,._.-..�.+_..��.:.:::.:».:;��»�-.:.:::.'... .......::...::..�:,..:.,
,Y=t�` �` ..... ... ..'^��r"
/ '+c`� :;:?3. . n" :::
__ _ __ _ _ _ �� _ —_ _ —_ _.. ,— . a_ � �,`._._... . `, r:%"-^ ,.
' y .... �.
Mw+mw.w.www�nwv` J •i- . . -••� - � _ _ � _
....... ",. :y . ............. .... . ' ^ � ;' � '�'_ .T...:�--
: ' �
• l+.-,. : .%
;�„`. �'•. '
.", ...... : ' �..
•: ..... ,...... ``......�i_L�,� � e`
.. . •�•� •►.LL , • �ll�►Z( ul� j '
� ...................................................
� ���
� 1 �� �-�
,�
I di `r�
� ^
-#c + �
� � ;
I
x _
� :
e � :
m
U
O �r
g?
N �i
� e4
aQ {�
t!
10/16/97 11:25 $612 490 1580 HOLSTAD&LARSON f� 002/005
Wayne B. Holstad
Russell L.C. Larson
John L. Lindel!
Karen Hill Fjeld t
j Real Propecty Law 5pecialist
October 16, 1997
HOLSTAD AND LARSON, P.L.C.
Attorneys at Law
3535 Vadnais Center Drive, Suite 130
St. Paul, Minnesota 55110
Telephone: (612) 490-9078
Facsimile: (612) 490-1580
Dr. Wiiliam Burns
City Manager, City of Fridfey
Fridley Municipal Center
6431 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
RE: Warden Oil Hazardous Site Issue
Dear Dr. Bums:
Of Counsel
Frederic W, Knaak*
* Also Licensed in
Wisconsin & Colorado
As you know, over the past several months, f have been monitoring events and
progress in the matter of the investigation by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency of
the Warden Oi� hazardous waste site in Minneapolis. The City of Fridley had, for many
years, contracted with Warden Oil to remove it`s used oil from the city garages for its
vehicles and maintenance. After purchasing the oil from the City, Warden evidently
combined the used oil with other used oil purchased from other businesses and entities
and re-refined it at its plant site. It is at that site where the polfut'ion allegedly occurred.
Because the City was identified in Warden Oil records as one of the sources of its oil
supply for its re-refining process, the City has been placed on the list of the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency of "potential responsible parties" (known as PRPs).
It is very important to note here that inclusion on the PRP list is a very preliminary
matter in such an investigation and is not a finding, preliminary or otherwise, of liability
on the part of the City. Inclusion on .such is list, though, is hardly an honor and, in
many cases is a likely source of those parties ultimately found to be "responsible"
within the meaning of the Superfund laws.
SuperFund site cleanup disputes are a notoriously complex and expensive litigation
area. Generally speaking, the various parties fend for themselves against each other
and ultimately, the State, to determine individual and collective liability. Victories
limiting liability to a set, small percentage of a total award are pyrrhic in the face of
potential joint and several liability. Site cleanups tend to be very expensive. In a world
where jobbers and small businesses involved in hazardous material pickup are
regularly insolvent, it.is the larger business entities that were the original source of the
materials that can get "stuck" with shouldering' costs of cleanup far in excess of any
value of the original materials..
10/16/97 11:25 $612 490 1580 HOLSTAD&LARSON I�j003/005 �
Dr. William Burns
October 16, 1997
Page Two
ln the case of the Warden Oil site, the Fridley materials represent significantly less
than one percent of the total material believed to be at the site. It is identified as the
fourteenth largest known product source on the list. Other entities identified are the
Soo Line Railroad, 3M, Honeywell, some car dealerships and sundry other enterprises.
Soo Line was, by far, the largest source identified in the �Warden Oil records, providing
some 15% of the identified product at the site. Unfortunately, though, many of the
other PRPs listed were contract jobbers and small busir�esses that either are, or are
likely to be, ouf of business. V�larden Oil itself is presently insolvent; but has a)ready
provided, as I understand it, substantial funds toward cleanup of its site.
!n an innovative move for Minnesota Superfund cases, apparently initiated by Soo Line
with the acquiescence and cooperation of the MPCA, a number of ihe PRP's in this
case began meeting to explore the possibility of taking .some early steps to limit
potential, collecfive liability. It was expressly understood that nobody was admitting to
any liability whatsoever in engaging in those discussions, nor accepting any other kind
of responsibility. Several meetings of PRP representatives have been held. Fridley
was invited on several occasions to PRP meeti�gs, and 1 attended fin►o of them at the
offices of Leonard, Street and Deinard, currently legal counsel for Soo Lirie (now
Canadian Paci�c).
Among the issues discussed were the collective measures that might be . taken to
influence the final MPCA determination in this matter, as well as collecting data for the
purpose of countering some of the assumptions apparently being made by the MPCA
about the site. It would appear, in preliminary engineering assessments of the site, for
example, that significant off-site sources for a number of the pollutants identified by the
MPCA may exist, lessening the probability that the pollution source was the Warden Oil
site itself. This would result in a significant reduction in overall liability. Moreover,
many of the cleanup efforts already undertaken at the site may have substantially
limited any further liabilities for soil corrections and similar mitigation efforts that might
ultimately have been required here. in other words, the coll�ction of additional data
and information could well have the effect of significantly limiting the collective potential
liability of the PRPs if the action were to proceed further.
Since the City's position throughout this case has been one of adamant denial of any
liability, potential or otherwise, I have not recommended formal participation in any
formal grouping of PRPs to date. This has avoided any public inference of concern by
the City of its legal liability, as well as any concerns such participation may r�ise in
non-legal arenas.
10/16/97 11:26 '�!'612 490 1580 HOLSTAD&LARSON �I004/005
Dr. William Bums
October 16, 1997
Page Three
What has now been put together, though, and what I am forwarding for the City's
consideration, is a limited PRP agreement designed to focus resources on a potentially
very kieneficial study to be done of the site by an environmental engineering group with
the intent of providing the positive data and information mentioned ear�ier. The
resulting data, which participation would make immediately availabte to the City, co�ild
have not only the effect of mitigating the initial cleanup liability, but could subsequently
serve the City as a very cost-effective base study for any defense of its own individual
liability, if that were to become necessary in this pEOCess.
At this point, since membership in the limited PRP group has not been established, it is
unclear what the City's cost would be for participating in the study, but l would not, at
this point, expect it to exceed a few hundred dollars. I will, of course, provide a more
precise number as soon, as it becomes available to me.
It is also possible that if this limited PRP group works effectively in accomplishing this
effort, it could serve as the basis of additional PRP cooperation in this matter in the
future. It is too early to say, as yet, whether Fri.dley's participation in future efforts is a
good idea or should be promised to other PRPs.
In order for Fridley to participate, a resolution authorizing participation would be
required of the City Council.
On a related issue, staff has been providing the Minnesota Pollution Confrol Agency
with all of the demanded discovery the City is required to provide as part of an
investigation in this kind of case. It is not yet clear whether the League of Cities
insurance coverage would ultimateJy cover any potential liability of this sort. Current
League policies, as well as standard policies of other municipal insurance providers,
expressly exclude coverage for pollution and environmental hazards. Since, howeve�,
most of the materials that allegedly were transported from Fridley to the Warden Oil
site arrived well before current policy language was in effect, an interesting question
remains as to wtiether prio� policy coverages may have included possible liability for
environmental hazards.
I would expect the League to deny �any coverage at this point. It would be my advice,
however, to advise them of this potential claim and permit them the opportunity to
participate on behalf of the City in these mitigation efforts. At least initially, it should be
the posture of the City that this is possible liability, now being acknowledged, that is
covered by policies in force.
10/16/97 11:27 $612 490 1580 HOLSTAD&LARSON f�005/005
Dr. William Burns
October 16, 1997
Page Four
I expect to be out of town tomoROw with my family. I will be back, however, on Monday.
Fee! free, as always, to field to me any question you or the Council may have regarding
this matter.
Sincerely, , � „
�,
���
Frederic W.
Fridley City Attorney
�
'1 �
._ _�
� ' ►� 1 : � 1
This agreement is made the _ day of , 1997, by and among the parties
("Participants") whose authorized representatives have executed this agreement.
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ("MPCA") has conducted certain
activities at the Warden Oil Site ("Site"), located at 187 Humboldt Avenue North, Minneapolis,
Minnesota, under the authority of the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act
("MERLA"), Minn. Stat. § 115B.01 et seq.
WHEREAS, the MPCA alleges that the undersigned Participants to this agreement and
certain other persons are responsible persons ("RPs") under MERLA for the release of hazardous
subs�ances, pollutants and/or contaminants at the Site;
WHEREAS, the Participants believe that it is in their joint interest to determine the
approximate range of costs associated with remediation of the Site to appropriate cleanup levels;
WHEREAS, the Participants may desire to undertake response action for the Site and
believe that certain cost savings may be realized in responding on a joint and cooperative basis to
issues relating to the Site;
WHEREAS, pursuant to these interests, the Participants desire to organize a Wazden Oil
Site Group and establish an organizational structure;
WHEREAS, the Participants seek to allocate expenses which the Warden Oil Site Group
may incur from time to time, without establishing any precedent as to an allocation method for
any possible partial or full settlement; and
1562937.03
1
0
WHEREAS, the Participants agree that participation in any joint effort, including but not
limited to, contributing to the funding of Warden Oil Site Group activities, is in no way to be
construed as an admission of liability by any of the Participants, and that the Participants
expressly do not admit any liability or obligation with respect to the Site.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual promises and
commitments set forth herein, THE PARTICIPANTS AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. FORMATION AND PURPOSE
1.1. Warden Oil Site Group. The Participants hereby organize and constitute
themselves as the Warden Oil Site Group ("Group"). Each Participant whose authorized
representative has executed this agreement is a member of the Group.
�1 1.2. Purpose. The purpose of this agreement is to: a) provide a means for the
Participants to jointly conduct activities needed to establish the approximate range of costs for
remediation of the Site to appropriate cleanup levels; b) to establish a mechanism to determine
whether the Group will undertake additional activities related to the Site; c) to provide a structure
to govern any activities that the Group undertakes in furtherance of the joint interests of the
Participants; and d) to establish an interim mechanism for allocating and paying the costs
associated with the above activities.
2. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
2.1 �teering Committee. To carry out the purposes of this agreement, the
Participants hereby establish a Steering Committee. Membership on the Steering Committee
shall be open to any Participant who agrees to make one or more representatives reasonably
1562937.03 2
�
available to participate actively in Steering Committee functions. The Steering Committee will
elect a Chair who shall also serve as Chair ("Chair") of the Group. The Chair will maintain a
current list of Participants who are members of the Steering Committee. If a Participant wishes
to be a member of the Steering Committee, the Participant shall notify the Group in writing and
membership shall be effective upon receipt of such notification. All Participant representatives,
including the Chair, shall serve on the Steering Committee as volunteers, without compensation
from the Group.
2.2 S rin� Co mittee Functions. The Steering Committee is authorized to:
(a) select and retain consultant(s) and contractor(s); (b) collect payments from the Participants
and disburse payments to implement this agreement, including without limitation, payments to
teclurical consultants; (c) communicate with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ("MPCA")
and any alleged RP on behalf of the Group; (d) conduct votes of the Group where required by
this Agreement; and (e) otherwise coordinate the Group's efforts pursuant to this agreement.
2.3 Notice of Steering Committee Meetin.g�. Whenever feasible, written
notice of the time, place, and purpose of any meeting of the Steering Committee shall be given
by the Chair to Participants at least twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting by
facsimile and U.S. mail. All Steering Committee meetings shall be open to all Participants, even
if the Participant is not a Member of the Steering Committee. Steering Committee meetings may
be held by telephone conference call.
2.4 Other Committees. A Technical Committee, an Allocation Committee,
and a Litigation Committee may be added at a later date, without amendment to this agreement,
1562937.03 3
if determined necessary by the Steering Committee. Membership on these Committees shall be
open to any Participant who expresses a willingness to make one or more representatives
reasonably available to participate actively in Committee functions and who so notifies the Chair
in writing. All Committee members shall serve as volunteers without compensation from the
Group. The duties and authorities of these Committees, if formed, shall be defined by the
Steering Committee, subject to approval by the Group.
3. QUORUM, GROUP MEETINGS AND DECISION MAKING
3.1 Definitions. For purposes of this agreement, the "Voting Power" of a
Participant shall constitute that percentage which the Participant's financial contribution
assessed, due and paid pursuant to this agreement bears to the financial contribution assessed,
due and paid by all Participants under this agreement at the time of the vote. The "total Voting
Power" means the combined Voting Power of all Participants at the time of the vote.
3.2 Quorum. A majority of the total Voting Power shall constitute a quorum
of the Group. A majority of the Participants who are members of the Steering Committee or any
other committee shall constitute a quorum thereof.
3.3 Groqp Meetines. Meetings of the Group may be called by the Chair, or by
any three or more Participants, or by any combination of Participants constituting 25 percent or
more of the total Voting Power. Notice of a meeting of the Group shall be given (by the Chair or
by the other parties authorized by this section to call such a meeting) to all Participants at least
seven (7) calendar days in advance of the meeting. At such a meeting, the Group may, if
authorized by a majority of the total Voting Power, direct the Steering Committee or other
1562937.03 4
committee to take certain actions and may overrule any proposed action of said committees. The
Steering Committee or other committee may refer any matter to a meeting of the Group.
Meetings of the Group may be held by telephone conference call.
3.4 p°^'�'^^ Makin¢ anc� VOtlrig In all meetings of the Group, the Steering
Committee, or other committees, the Participants shall attempt to make decisions by consensus
without vote. Except in those cases specified in this agreement as requiring a specified
P
ercentage of the Voting Power, all decisions which cannot be reached by consensus shall be
decided by a majority of those Participants who are members of the Group or a committee and
who are present and voting.
4. PAYMENTS
4.1 Shared Costs. Those activities authorized by the Group to be undertaken
on behalf of the Group shall be funded by the Participants as Shared Costs.
�' 4.2 Initial Interim Pa�ment• Each Participant agrees to pay, as interim funding
for Shazed Costs authorized by this agreement, an amount equal to the Participant's alleged
percentage of the total gallons that the MPCA alleges all Participants in the Group contributed to
the Site, multiplied by $50,000, except that the minimum initial interim payment for participation
in the Group shall be $500. The number of gallons allegedly attributable to each Participant for
purposes of allocating this initial payment shall be the amount set forth on the MPCA's Draft
Warden Oil Site Potential Responsible Party Totals Table (attached as Exhibit 1), except for
NSP, which is not listed on the Table. For NSP, 100,000 gallons shall be used. The initial
payment shall be made within 30 days after notice from the Steering Committee of the amount
I 562937.03
5
�
owing and the initial payment shall be non-refundable. The initial interim payment shall be paid
by check made payable to "Leonard, Street and Deinazd Trust Account." The check shall
reference the "Warden Oil Site" and be sent to:
Byron E. Starns, Esq.
Leonard, Street and Deinard
Minnesota World Trade Center, Suite 2200
30 East Seventh Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
4.3 Additional Interim Pavments. After the initial payment, additional
payments shall be required only if authorized by amendment to this agreement.
4.4 Trust Account. All monies paid by Participants pursuant to this agreement
shall be used solely for the purposes authorized under this agreement and shall be placed in
Leonard, Street and Deinard's IOLTA trust account or an interest-bearing trust account. The
Steering Committee must approve expenditures from the trust account. The Steering Committee
shall also elect a treasurer, who shall maintain an accounting of the trust account.
4.5 E�ccounting for Funds. Upon termination of this agreement, a final
accounting will be made. Any monies remaining in the trust account established under
paragraph 4.4 in excess of all costs incurred pursuant to this agreement will be refunded in
proportion to each Participant's total contribution at the time of the final accounting.
4.6 Final Allocation Credit. If any or all Participants to this Agreement reach
a settlement as to final allocation, each Participant to the settlement shall be credited against that
Participant's final allocation share for all payments made under this agreement.
4.7 Limit of Expenditure. The Shared Costs shall not exceed the amount
collected by the Group pursuant to Section 4.2 unless additional payments are authorized
pursuant to Section 4.3.
i 362937.03 6
5.0 TERM OF THE GROUP
5.1 Group Determination of Term. This Group sfiall be in existence until a
majority of the total Voting Power deems it no longer necessary or worthwhile.
5.2 Vote In General. If the Steering Committee concludes that the Group is
no longer necessary or worthwhile, it will conduct a vote at a meeting of the Group to determine
whether the Group should continue to exist under the terms of this agreement.
5.3 Vote After Consult�nt Work. In any event, there shall be a vote at a
meeting of the Group on whether the Group should continue to exist and conduct additional work
after the consultant retained by the Group has presented its estimate of the range of approximate
costs of remediation of the Site to different cieanup levels.
5.4 Vote b, Proxv. A Participant unable to attend a Group meeting conducted
under this section may assign, in writing, its vote to another Participant.
�,
6.0 WITHDRAWAL AND REMOVAL
6.1 Right of Withdrawal. Any Participant may withdraw from participation in
this agreement upon written notice to the Chair. This withdrawal shall be effective the date the
notice is received by the Chair. The withdrawing party shall receive no refund of any payment(s)
already made under this agreement. The withdrawing party shall not be obligated to make any
payments for costs incurred by the Group after the date of withdrawal.
6.2 Bemoval of a P�r�icipant. If a Participant's interests or actions are in
conflict with the purpose of this agreement, the Participant may be removed by a vote of at least
two-thirds (2/3rds) of the total Voting Power at a meeting of the Group. Any Participant in
default of making any payment due pursuant to this agreement may be removed by the Steering
Committee. A Participant removed pursuant to this section shall receive a refund of any funds
not expended or encumbered at the time of the removal, in an amount proportionate to the
Participant's payment assessed and paid pursuant to this agreement. A Participant removed
1562937.03 %
pursuant to this section shall not be obligated to make any payments for costs incuned by the
Group after the date of removal.
7.0 RELEASE AND SURVIVAL
7.1 �.�g. No Participant with representative(s) serving on any Committee
and no individual member of any Committee shall be liable to any Participant for any claim,
liability, demand, expense, legal fee or loss incuned or resulting from any good-faith acts or
omissions by any member of any Committee under this agreement.
7.2 Survival. The terms of this section shall survive the termination of this
agreement. Withdrawal or removal of a Participant from this agreement, as set forth in Section
� 6, shall not terminate the Participant's obligations and protections under pazagraph 7.1, which
shall continue in full force and effect as if the Participant had not withdrawn or been removed
from this agreement.
' 8. DENIAL OF LIABILITY
This agreement shall not constitute, be interpreted, construed or used as evidence of any
admission of liability, law or fact, a waiver of any right or defense, or any estoppel against any
Participant by any other Participant or any other person not a Participant. The temporary
allocation scheme and payments agreed to by the Participants are solely for purposes of
facilitating a response to the MPCA's request that a potentially responsible party group be
formed and action taken to remediate the Site, and do not constitute or reflect any final or
binding allocation of responsibility. However, nothing in this section is intended or should be
construed to limit or bar the enforcement of any provision of this agreement against any party to
this agreement.
9. TEMPORARY DELAY OF LITIGATION
Each Participant agrees not to commence any litigation pertaining to the Site against any
other Participant until the termination of this agreement or until the Participant withdraws or is
1562937.03 g
removed. Each Participant further agrees to toll all statutes of limitations during such time
period. This paragraph shall not be construed or interpreted as a release or covenant not to sue.
All Participants reserve all rights, defenses or claims that such Participant may have regarding
any person or party.
10. RIGHTS AGAINST THIRD PARTIES
Nothing in this agreement shall affect in any way any right, claim, defense, interest or
cause of action that any Participant may have with respect to any entity or person that is not a
party to this agreement.
11. CONFIDENTIALITY
� 11.1 Nondisclosure. No Participant shall disclose or permit to be disclosed any
documents or information developed or obtained pursuant to this agreement (hereinafter "Shazed
Information"), whether or not legally privileged or protected, to those who are not signatories to
this agreement, except to the extent disclosure is required by law, the documents or information
disclosed are matters of public record or have been published, or the disclosure is expressly
permitted by this agreement. The Participants agree that all documents and information disclosed
or transmitted among them pursuant to this agreement are subject to the joint defense privilege to
the extent the document or information is covered by the attorney-client privilege or work-
product doctrine. Any Participant may shaze such documents and information with attorneys and
experts or consultants engaged by that Participant, or with its insurers with respect to any claims
for defense or indemnity when necessary, provided the Participant makes a good-faith effort to
obtain from the person to whom disclosure is made an acknowledgment in writing that such
material is to be maintained in confidence by such person as if a party hereto, and provided the
Participant uses its best effort to protect the privileges applicable to Shared Information. .If
confidential information pursuant to this agreement becomes a subject of an administrative order,
judicial order or discovery request requiring disc(osure of such information, the Participant may
I362937.03 9
satisfy its confidentiality obligations hereunder by notifying the Steering Committee and the
party that generated the information, thereby giving those parties the opportunity to protect the
confidentiality of the information before it is disclosed.
11.2 Government Data Practices Act. Notwithstanding section 11.1, each
Participant acknowledges and understands that any public entities which are Participants may be
required by law to disclose all or portions of the Shazed Information to the public if requested,
and such disclosure by the public entity shall not constitute a violation of the confidentiality
provisions of this Agreement. Such public entity Participants shall use their best efforts to 1)
keep Shared Information confidential to the extent permitted by law; and 2) inform the Chair of
� any request for Shared Information promptly after such request is made, and not oppose any
steps the Group may take to prevent disclosure through court order or other applicable process.
As part of its best efforts to keep Shared Information confidential pursuant to this Section
.,
11.2, a public entity receiving a disclosure request for any Shared Information shall take the
position that the requested information is exempt from disclosure under applicable law, but this
requirement applies: •
a) only as to those portions of the requested Shared Information for which
the public entity determines there is a good faith basis for an exemption
from disclosure in applicable law; and
b) only until such time as a contrary determination may be made by the
Minnesota Department of Administration pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §
13.072, or as otherwise directed or ordered by an administrative or judicial
body.
11.3 Survival. The terms of this section shall survive the termination of this
agreement. Withdrawal or removal of a Participant from this agreement, as set forth in Section
i 362937.03 10
6, shall not terminate this commitment of confidentiality, which shall continue in full force and
effect as if the Participant had not withdrawn or been removed from this agreement.
12. RELATIONSHIP OF MEMBERS
No Participant, or representative or counsel for any Participant, has acted as counsel for
any other Participant with respect to such other Participant entering into this agreement, except
as expressly engaged by such other Participant with respect to this agreement, and each
Participant represents that it has sought and obtained any appropriate legal advice it deems
necessary prior to entering into this agreement.
No Participant, or its representative serving on any Committee, shall act or be deemed to
act as legal counsel or a representative of any other Participant, unless expressly retained by such
other Participant for such purpose, and except for such express retention, no attorney-client
relationship is intended to be created between representatives on any Committee, on the one
.�
hand, and the Participants, on the other hand.
Nothing herein shall be deemed to create a partnership or joint venture and/or principal-
agent relationship between or among the Participants.
13. AMENDMENT
13.1 Amendment Process. This agreement may be amended only by a vote of
at least two-thirds (2/3rds) of the total Voting Power. Such a vote shall be taken only at a
meeting of the Group called for the purpose of considering such an amendment. A Participant
unable to attend such a meeting of the Group may assign, in writing, its vote to another
Participant. Such an amendment shall become effective immediately.
13.2 Limitations on menc�mPnt, Sections 7, 8 and 11 cannot be amended to
negate, diminish, or othenuise eliminate the obligations relating to release, denial of liability, and
confidentiality set forth in Sections 7, 8�nd 11 agreed to by the Participants to this agreement.
1562937.03 1 1
14. EFFECTIVE DATE AND METHOD OF EXECUTION
The effective date of this agreement shall be the date specified on page one of this
agreement. Executed signature pages shall be faxed, with an original signature page to be mailed
on the date of signing, to:
Byron E. Starns, Esq.
Leonard, Street and Deinazd
Minnesota World Trade Center, Suite 2270
30 East Seventh Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
This agreement shall be executed in multiple counterparts, any one of which shall be deemed an
- original but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
15. SEPARABILITY
If any provision of this agreement is deemed invalid or unenforceable, the balance of this
agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
16. LAW
This agreement shall be interpreted under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
17. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
This Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the Participants. No
assignment or delegation of the obligation to make any payment or reimbursement hereund�c
will release the assigning Participant without the prior unanimous written consent of the ott�er
Participants.
I362937.03 I Z
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Participants hereto enter into this WARDEN OIL
SITE INTERIM FLTNDING AGREEMENT. Each person signing this agreement represents and
warrants that he or she is duly authorized to enter into this agreement and bind the company or
entity on whose behalf that person is signing.
Name of Participant:
Address:
� Dated:
By:
-,
Signature of Participant's Representative
Name of Participant's Representative
Title of Participant's Representative
Designated Representative for
Receipt of Notice:
Name:
Address:
Telephone Number:
Facsimile Number:
156293'1.03 13
E-Mail Address:
Our representative(s),
(Name of Individual(s))
wishes to serve on the Steering Committee.
1562937.03 14
fax number
.
DRAFT
Warden Oil Site Potentiai Responsible Party Totals
1 �Soo Milwaukee RR
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
25
26
27
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
John Nyhien
Larry Schaff
Albrecht Oil
Northwest Airlines
Bert's Drain Oil Service
Honeywell
Rollins Oil Co. Inc.
MN Rubber
C.S. McCrossan
Gopher Oil Co:
T.J.'s Drain Oil Service
Product Design 8 Engineerin
Super Value
City of Fridley
Chicago Northwestern RR
Ziegler
Brookdale Pontiac
Waste Oii Services
Plastic inc.
Gateway Foods
Stan Koch 8 Son's
Graco Inc.
Doty � Son's
Minnegasco
Courier Maii and Dispatch
Smith Bros.
N.W. Swissmatic
3M
Metro Waste Control
Humboldt Service Unocal 76 I
Duke's Amoco
T.C.R. Corp.
Hiawatha Rubber
Maplewood Toyota 2873 High
Arlen Lindquist
Doc's Auto
Paul Williams Tire
City of Mpls.
Griggs Construction
Summit Gear
McGill � Jensen
's Union T6
61, Maplewood
Total Gallons for PRP's 1- 41
Total
1- 41 as percent of total qallons
Page 1
gallons
893625
742236
471515
300500
286154
229147
201228
140280
74500
58275
49950
48Q89
44300
43675
42915 �
01
38430
38225
37725
31200
29625
28350
27900
25060
23325
23110
22875
21600
20550
20375
19480
19100
18600
18575
18300
1T750
17175
16430
16410
16160
16055
15700
14685
4277809
enti�ed I 5859557
73.0056726
percent as totai
of galions
identified
15.250726292
12.667100943
8.046939385
5.128374039
4.883543244
3.910653997
3.434184530
2.394037638
1.271427174
0.994529109
0.852453522
0.820693442
0.756029850
0.745363515
0.732393251
0.659606178
0.655851628
0.652353070
0.643820002
0.532463461
0.505584296
0.483824972
0.476145210
0.427677382
0.398067635
0.394398416
0.390387874
0.368628550
0.347722 d�:; :
0.33244t�3�u;
0.32596":: :
0.31743(i `i �� �
0.317003�;
0.312310299 �
0.302923^'' '
0.29311 C;r.
0.28039E���" .
0.280055�u':
0.275788767
0.273996823
0.267938344
0.250616216
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Wzlliam W. Burns
M E M O R A N D l�l M City Manager
The Honorable Mayo�r and City Council
William W. Burns, City Manager ;� �
���
October 16, 1997
SUBJECT: Rice Creek Bank Stabilization Project
Prior to the last Council meeting, John Flora had requested that a motion be included on the
agenda for the last Council meeting establishing a public hearing date in the above matter for
November 10, 1997. I did not include the item on the agenda because I thought we needed
to discuss the project further during a conference meeting. Accordingly, I have asked John
Flora to be present at Monday night's conference meeting to discuss the project and how it
fits into our overall storm drainage capital improvements master plan.
Attached is some information .on the project that I thought you might want to review by
Monday night's meeting.
1�J�h�/:3�
Attachment
�
City of Fridley
TO: William W. Bums, City Manager
FROM: John G. F1ora�Public Works Director
DATE: October 13, 1997
SUBJECT: Rice Creek Bank Stabilization Project
PW97-265
On September 23, 1997, I had a meeting with residents along Rice Creek in the 400-600 block. As a result
of that meeting, I have received a petition with 1 S signatures of the 23 properties involved.
As a means of expediting the project hopefully for a winter project this year or a summer project next year,
I propose we hold a public hearing on November 10, 1997.
Recommend the City Council set a public hearing for the Rice Creek Bank Stabilization Project No. 309
for November 10, 1997. This project would involve 50% funding by the Rice Creek Watershed District,
25% funding by the City and 25% spread to the individuals who benefit by the project on a lineaz foot basis.
Estimated Cost $250,000.
JGF:cz
RICE CREEK B�u�iK STA.B[LIZATIOti PETITION
SEPTEI�IBER 1997
We, che residrnts on Rice Creek, request the Ciry of Fridley to proceed with the proposal to stabilizing the banks of
the creek. We understand that the Rice Creek Watershed Dish-ict will fund 50% and the City 2�%, with the
remaining 25% spread on a linear foot basis to the benefited properties. We also understand that the individual
property owners may pay their share upon completion of the project nr request the Ciry to assess the cost over 15
years.
YA;�iE PLY APPROX ADDRESS
LEYGTH
-.7 ,�
,,. ;,;�; � 14-12-0001 80 �190 69TH AVE
(� �
v 14-21-0002 110 � 80 69TH AVE
� J 14-21-0010 . 100 490 RICE CREEK BLVD
, c.�
�%" 14-21-0009• 60 500 RICE CREEK BLVD
r .
14-21-0008 ' 100 520 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21 b007 • 70 530 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0006 ' 110 540 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0005 • 104 550 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0004 ' 80 560 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0003 lOQ 570 RICE CREEK BLVD
' 14-21-0056 � 110 497 RICE CREEK TERRACE
. .•.
�' `, �� 14-21-0055 • 110 513 RICE CREEK TERR�CE
14-21-0054 . ` 20 52� RICE CREEK T'ERRACE
; .��y_ 14-21-0051 60 �61 RICE CREEK TERRACE
14-12-0071 130 56� RICE CREEK TERRACE
�'�-Q--�-- � 4-21-0062 - 750 567 RICE CREEK TERRACE
=�% ��" � 14-I2-0068 • 140 573 RICE CREEK TER.RACE
� ��" "�3 S 14-12-0067 . 40 � 77 RICE CREEK TERRACE
i � o
:� �
`. � % 14-12-0056 • 100 581 RICE CREEK TERRAC'E
�,�.� ��� ' 14-12-006� " 80 585 RICE CREEK T'ERRACE
� - . � • 14-12-0064 ' 130 589 RICE CREEK'I'ERRACE
� 1412-0063 100 �93 RICE CREEK TERRACE
�
' � � _ 14-12-0062 100 601 RICE CREEK TER.RACE `�.
Total Len h 2.900
r�
C.�wp`rrecks`nce�rkw(?0 500.tb1
i3
City of Fridley
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager
FROM: John G. Flora� Public Works Director
DATE: September 24, 1997
SUBJECT: Rice Creek Bank Stabilization Meeting
da Se tember 23, 1997, I held a meeting with the Rice Creek property owners associated with the
On Tues y, P
bank stabilization project in the 400-600 block area.
Thirteen
residents representing 10 properties were in attendance as well as Councilman Barnette.
The urpose of the meeting was to outline the past historyreekhn an attemptto control the e os on�thatis
P
installing a retaining wall along the outside curves of t e
occumng
. I also re-identified the Rice Creek Watershed District's propuc n t the costto the� res dents t J25% of
the City's willingness to contribute 25% of the project, therefore, re S
the overall cost.
r ex lained that the project, if it was to proceed, would be bidri uh'"�oas feet of the channel and slope
I furthe p
panels or KeystoneNersa-lok blocks. The proposal would be to P
seedin or sodding as well as planting bushes along the creeks edge. I identified that the cost would range to
g
the residents between $19 and $25 per running foot.
the meetin 10 of the residents signed the petition in support of the project and took copies of the petition
At g
to obtain their neighbors signature.
s resented that once sufficient signatures were received on t Ori etthe c�osts were identified t It as�also
It wa p
to the council for advertisement and present it back to the residents
ex lained that depending on time, the project could either be initiated this fall and completed next summer or
P
could be awarded this fall for a 1998 construction.
Once
I receive an excess of 50% of the property owners affected, I propose to present the project to the council.
JGF:cz
' y
RICE CREEK BANK STABILIZATION NIEETING
SEPTENIBER 23, 1997
NAME ADDRESS
.--� ,
; ,; , �.. . , . `' ' � , 490 69TH AVE
; , � �
, � '`% �, ��t,-�; 580 69TH AVE
✓
�� !� .�� J � 490 RICE CREEK BLVD
� � �'! =� , , , .��-,
_�,-'-- .
;�_;. �=; ,� 500 RICE CREEK BLVD
_ / -- �i-. % �:
520 RICE CREEK BLVD
530 RICE CREEK BLVD
540 RICE CREEK BLVD
550 RICE CREEK BLVD
560 RICE CREEK BLVD
570 RICE CREEK BLVD
497 RICE CREEK TERRACE
� `,' ` � , -� �', : � � l 513 RICE CREEK TERR.ACE
�, �
" 525 RICE CREEK TERRACE
i
✓ ! �'
�.�,,,L, %� ,�r ., ,` 561 RICE CREEK TERRACE
565 RICE CREEK TERRACE
q) � 567 RICE CREEK TERRACE
k/�:= r-�. �. �C� C;`�� � ClL :C
573 RICE CREEK TERRACE
577 RICE CREEK TERRACE
581 RICE CREEK TERRACE
� � �; ;.� ��:,,; - " ' ;, � -�,�i 585 RICE CREEK TERRACE
� � �
� 589 RICE CREEK TERRACE
�_i�,� . ; �' ,� ..� 593 RICE CREEK TERR.ACE
601 RICE CREEK TERRACE
'1 ? _ -
,. ; -- . �L . .; .
i`� .�; �` ,i��-iu� . c" _�`�/ �-�LC,� L'"z G� �����
► '�
C:\wp\creeks�rice-crk\400 600.tb1
RCWD SBBS 400 - 600 BLOCK
�1A�IE PIN APPROX ADDRESS
LENGTH
Roger Nelson 14-12-0001 80 490 69TH AVE
Scott Lund 14-21-0002 110 580 69TH AVE
Robert Schroer 14-21-0010 100 490 RICE CREEK BLVD
Donald Dibos 14-21-0009 60 500 RICE CREEK BLVD
Ernest Petrangelo 14-21-0008 100 520 RICE CREEK BLVD
Gerald DeShaw 14-21-0007 70 530 RICE CREEK BLVD
John Ellis 14-21-0006 110 540 RICE CREEK BLVD
Todd Johnson 14-21-0005 104 550 RICE CREEK BLVD
John Vye 14-21-0004 80 560 RICE CREEK BLVD
Gary Alferness 14-21-0003 100 570 RICE CREEK BLVD
Dominick Zawislak 14-21-0056 110 497 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Gary Knight 14-21-0055 110 513 RICE CREEK TERR.ACE
Paul Steen 14-21-0054 20 525 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Leon Madsen 14-21-0051 60 561 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Brooks Berg 14-12-0071 130 565 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Diane Savage 14-21-0062 750 567 RICE CREEK TERRACE
John Flora 14-12-0068 140 573 RICE CREEK TERRACE
James Gibbs 14-12-0067 40 577 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Tom Thompson 14-12-0066 100 581 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Roger Kaye 14-12-0065 80 585 RICE CREEK TERRACE
David Blaska 14-12-0064 130 589 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Walter Samuelson 14-12-0063 100 593 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Randy Holt 14-12-0062 100 601 RICE CREEK TERRACE
Total Len th 2,900
C:\wp\creekslrice-crk�400 600.tb1
�
RICE CREEK B�u�iK STABILIZATION PETITIOI�'
SEPTE�IBER 1997
We, the residents on Rice Creek, request the City of Fridley to proceed with the proposal to stabilizing the banks of
the creek. �Ve understand that the Rice Creek Watershed District will fund �0% and the City 25%, with the
remaining 25% spread on a linear foot basis to the benefited properties. We also understand that the individual
property owners may pay their share upon completion of the project � request the City to assess the cost over 15
years.
NAlVIE PIN APPROX ADDRESS
LENGTFI
-� ---> „
u'� � 14-12-0001 80 490 69TH AVE
� ,:�!'x �"� -.r �: %. � ' ! .i �I,%;
� 1 '�'� % �y'^ 14-21-0002 110 580 69TH AVE
/�!2'(, / /`� L��Y1.L"
.• ��'���,� .� J f�_ _ 14-21-0010 100 490 RICE CREEK BLVD
�� ���`'!��=___ 14-21-0009 60 500 RICE CREEK BLVD
l', • � ��., �
" `�
14-21-0008 100 520 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0007 70 530 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0006 110 �40 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0005 104 5�0 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0004 80 560 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0003 100 570 RICE CREEK BLVD
14-21-0056 110 497 RICE CREEK TERRACE
��� -���' -% 14-21-0055 110 513 RICE CREEK TERRACE
.r; , �=` � l� � , �
% ,C�i(.�,Q�G� 14-21-0054 20 ' S25 RICE CREEK TERRACE
v� ,
��, �-%� �, r.,..�=�_ 14-21-0051 60 561 RICE CREEK TERRACE
�� 14-12-0071 130 56� RICE CREEK TERRACE
,
'f� tii� _.�- ,2 :�„r .� '• �� �. �i �� . ..,, 14-21-0062 750 567 RICE CREEK TERRACE
� � �- i ;��- : ,�r.,.
14-12-0068 140 573 RICE CREEK TERR.ACE
14-12-0067 40 577 RICE CREEK TERRACE
14-12-0066 100 581 RICE CREEK TERRACE
j!' �� .14-12-0065 80 585 RICE CREEK TERRACE
/� i�r %'"�y/'� �� �� - %f !�k�
�.. , i ,
14-12-0064 130 589 RICE. CREEK TERRACE
��'%-�••�'i , i; r�. ,�' 14-12-0063 100 593 RICE CREEK TERRACE
� Ct,., ,� . �� l� �
14-12-0062 100 601 RICE CREEK TERRACE
� Total Len th 2,900
C:\wp\crceksUice-crk\400_600.tb1
^ . ----- ' . '.. . , . : , , � \ �"J ;.
� i i ! i � � i I I j � � � � ' � �, � �
I i U ^` .
Cn �� V�J i
' i ! � � �—J �� I I � � •O '
; ;-� � ; , � i , ��\ � � I Z � �
� ; � i i i; � �
�
�
CfTY OF
FRIDLEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
William W. Burns
MEMORANDUM CityManager
The Honorable Mayor and City Council
William W. Burns, City Manager �: � 1�
October 16, 1997
SUBJECT: 1998 Council Meeting and Holiday Schedule
On Monday night, I would like to discuss the attached 1998 Council meeting and holiday
schedule. A few weeks ago, we sent a proposed calendar to you for your review. The only
person to comment on it was Councilmember Ann Bolkcom, who asked if the March 23
Council meeting date could be changed to either March 16 or March 30. We do need to
resolve this issue and any other issues that you may have regarding the proposed calendar.
I would like to put it on the agenda for the October 27, 1997, Council meeting.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
WWB:rsc
Attachment
r
�
Cff'Y OF
FRIDLEY
January
S M T W T F S
4 6 7 8 9 10
11 13 14 IS t6 17
18 20 21 22 23 24
25 27 28 29 30 31
February
S M T W T F S
1 3 4 5 6 7
8 Q9 10 11 12 13 14
15 D( 17 18 19 2 0 21
22 � 24 25 26 27 28
March
S T W T F S
�
1 I1 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 � 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
April
S M T W T F S
5 Q6 7 8 9��
� 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 � 21 22 23 24 25
26 2 28 29 30
May
S M T W T F S
3 5 6 7 8 9
10 12 13 14 15 16
17 1 19 20 21 22 23
24 26 27 28 29 30
31
June
S T W T F S
7 10 I1 13
14 16 17 18 19 20
21 23 24 25 26 27
28 30
, , -
.
cirr a� �t�vcFr
January 1
January 19
February 16
May 25
July 3
September 7
October 12
November 11
November 26
November 27
December 25
HOLIDAYS
New Year's Day
Martin Luther King, Jr.
President's Day
Memorial Day
Friday before Independence Day
Labor Day
Columbus Day
., .
fRIDLEY
July
S M T W T F S
�Z
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 14 15 16 17 18
19 2 21 22 23 24 2�
26 28 29 30 31
August
S M T W T F S
Veterans Day - '
Thanksgiving 9 ii ti is ia i8
Friday after Thanksgiving 23 25 26 27 28 29
Christmas 30
RELIGIOUS HOLIDAYS
April 10
April 11
April 12
September 21
September 30
December 14
Good Friday
Passover
Easter Sunday
Rosh Hashanah
Yom Kippur
Hanukkah
CONFERENCES
March 7- 10 NLC Cong. Cities.
June 9 - 12 LMC--Annual (Duluth)
October 25 - 28 ICMA--Annual (Orlando)
December 1- 5 NLC Cong. of Cities (Kansas)
X Holiday
� Religious Holiday
O Council Meeting
❑ Conference Meeting
� Budget Work Session
10/17/97
September
S M T W T F S
�
6 8 9 10 11 12
13 IS !6 17 18 19
20 22 � 24 25 26
27 2 29
October
S M T W T F S
4 QS 6 7 8 9 10
11 13 t4 15 16 17
18 1 20 21 22 23 24
29 30 31
November
S M T W T F S
a 9 io x i2 i� ia
15 17 18 19 20 21
22 24 25 � �' 28
29 30
December
S M T W T F S
�
6� 8 9 10 i l 12
13 , 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 X 26
27 28 29 30 31