The URL can be used to link to this page

07/26/1999 - 4656� FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ��,� ATTENDENCE SHEET Mo-v�day, Ju.�y 26, 1999 �. ° 7:30 P.M. PLEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN ITEM PRINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS NUMBER /� f F,�gnc�, f�' � ; � C:�c� � % � �� , � .. % �� tG� �r-i� ��; � � �' � �c°r / 7 � � , %` � %' l / ° � �� i, � � � , .. �'\. " 1 . � � � - ,,( �� -S �/( �-��G �` ��" l�/� C.� L , i� s � ; � � �� n ,�_ � � G .� c� �-- �s-d�'l� C- �,�' . �' , , � , ��'% � �'� � " �� - � � ` ! � " �' � - �� r� � �- , � ; _� � �, r! '� S � ` ',�`� �u �� ., �� '� � > P/' -� �. � � � - `�� ` p�, , s�� ` � ,� n �� 0 � � � � �l i � l�~; �fs ,� � ��-�� J \ ` � f. ' f/�/ ,/ . f% �� _� � � .. W//'�✓f'�:,. � / . / ,�p.�j:° �C �/� :; % ' /,'-;� �Li � � � _ - -C— ��'�' � ° f . ! J � �.t �= /l - �` , �. vi�✓ T�ci-o�S�� `'�' C/�� j � � �'Zi� C � G � ' Cr �' � Sj �;� w �i'� � r;Y i' � o� � �i � - � � „ � � �1��i� �'.� � (� t� v�� 1� ��=-/ s �=/�' �� S r, � _. ' ` '� � � � �Fi� � � � _ � ��G U9�T l�✓� w � , � � . � �' - � � � �� ; �� . j �' � C1��' �� - - ' � ,� .�� - , � � �� G= � :� ��- � .� � �� %�, ��,� ��''� � ��11 �j c�d � � � � �� — ��,6��,� � � � .� ��`-�� / ��=�- _, - �� = ,�, ��'�. �� , � �� ry �,�j�-�c.v� ��t c-��-" / � � � � ��v �� /��2r,�rtc.-�� G� � �� -, � � � � :��.�� ,i - ✓� � � � �� ;� , �� , �'�'`"` -J ,�..� /�_��____� �i �"'� � �,,t�--�_ � / 11 � , �� C/�/� %' `"-ct._.. � �-'' _� c; � -�. G��.� /�'�I � C �' / � ��' � � �� . /✓�� l.Ci � �j�� V'�� w-1- ' �� 3 `—°� � ��c 5 �. �G �. �Y � � � � �� %-�� / � � C,�.tt�� ''�y �6-� ��, �- 4 ;:��v ��s( 1 �� s� �,,� . ,�`:, :�� , ��-vL %��s �� n� �---� X �' ��,� �� o� ��'�, � S Si �5; }�i�'� S �, yU �. � �``�- �� c� �� -� �� d �7 5 �� P�t i��,�,�C. E ��-� �-.� ' - - ,- 1 �' . - � � !?� `�� `' `�" 3 � �� 5�1� fi� � � � � 1 � � C�- ► b � ��1 � �,��- �z� c - �, � i .� ��, ; �� CC z �`� l�°5� l�'�� ,�� ; � Lc C., .� ,, � �� `�i. 7��a �� ,.�, ' � ' �� _ � � ��— c� �� r � � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26,`:'1999 CfTY OF FRIDLEY The City of Fridley will not discriminate against or harass anyone in the admission or access.to, or treatment, or employment in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabiiities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PROCLAMATION: Law Enforcement Sunday — August 9, 1999 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of July 12, 1999 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS: 1. Receive the Planning Commission Minutes of July7, 1999 ............................................................................e.... 1�- 27 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26,1999 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED)• 2. Resolution Approving a Subdivision, Lot Split, LS #99-01, to Create Two Residential Lots, Generally Located at 1132 Mississippi StreetN.E. (Ward 2) .................................................................. 28 - 35 3. Approve Amendment to the Comprehensive Sign Plan for University Business Center (7920 — 7996 University Avenue) (Ward 3) ................................ 36 - 40 4. Approve Temporary Sign Permit for Michael Servetus Unitarian Church (6565 Oakley UriveN.E.) (Ward 1) ................................................:........:........ 41 5. Resolution Authorizing an Increase in � Employer Health Insurance Premium Contributions for the 1999-2000 Plan Year ................................ 42 - 43 6. Claims ....................................................................................... 44 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26,1999 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): , 7. Licenses ..................................................................................... 45 - 48 � 8. Estimates ................................................................................... 49 ADOPTION OF AGENDA. 4PEN FORUM, VISITORS: (Consideration of Items not on Agenda - 15 Minutes) PUBLIC HEARING: 9. Application for Special Legislative Funding from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development for the Trunk Highway 65 Highway Improvement Project Design Fees .................................................. 50 - 59 � NEW BUSINESS: � 10. Special Use Permit, SP #99-04, by Jeffrey Vogel, Grace Evangelical Free Church, to Expand the Educational, Administrative, and Gymnasium Space of the Church, Generally Located at 755 — 73�d Avenue N.E. (Ward 1) ...............e................... 60 - 72 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26,1999 PAGE 4 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED)• r 11. Resolution Authorizing Application for Special - Legislative Funding from the Department of « Trade and Economic Development and Authorizing Execution of the Agreement (Trunk Highway 65 Highway Improvement Project Design Fees) .................................. 73 - 74 12. First Reading of an Ordinance of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, Amending the City Code to Include a new Chapter 409, Entitled "Franchise Fees" ................................................................................................ 75 - 80 13. Informal Status Reports ................................................................... 81 ADJOURN. � . �.o �f-�-�S -- '�, GoP� � � GTY OF FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL I�IEETING'`OF JULY 26, 1999 The City of Fridley will not discriminate against or harass anyone in the admission or access to, or treatment, or employment in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed, rel;gion, national origin, sex,-disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) �-,�r�e d c�-�- 7 � 3 � PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PROCLAMATION: Law Enforcement Sunday — August 1, 1999 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: �' � �� sa� City Council Meeting of July 12, 1999 � ,. .. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED�NSENT AGENDA: � � �,� s.�', NEW BUSINESS: r1 ��' � Receive the Planning Commission Minutes of July 7, 1999 ....................................... 1- 27 yb� ��B 2. Resolution Approving a Subdivision, Lot l�(� Split, LS #99-01, to Create Two Residenti Lots, Generally Located at 1132 Mississippi Street N.E. (Ward 2) .....................��vQ,28 - 35 �` APF�ROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): Approve Amendment to the Comp� ehensive Sign Plan for Universiry Business Center (7920 — 7996 University Avenue) (Ward 3) ....................................... 36 - 40 �� 4. Approve Temporary Sign Pe�mit for Michael Servetus Unitarian Church (6565 Oakley Driv2 N.E.) (W�rd 1) ............................. 41 c�°� �".. �� 5. Resolution Authorizing an Increase in q� Employer Health Insurance Premium �� Contributions for the 1999-2000 Plan Year.......... `� .......................... 42 - 43 � � J�. ��e Claims.............�........................ 44 (� OJ Q`-"�" 7. Licenses 8. Estimates ................... r.. ��s� �� ............�.� Q`�� ° .......... 45 - 48 ....... 49 r' � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY ADOPTION OF AGENDA. � � ) � OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: a� �� (Consideration of Items not on Agenda - 15 Minutes) PUBLIC HEARING: g `av �� I� � 1999 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED)• �AGE 2 13. Informal Status Reports ........... 81 ��c�o�� `�✓�S��r �aSi`�'i�,� CraI�G�IAraok GZrt.c� �- S i�VIS d'�SLt,S'S�t� i�C�. ��' �J:lrO�p+�, ADJOURN. f� /� 1 �� 3 a '�t ��c,J ss�c�o,�� (� p-L� - �e c��G 9. Application for Special Legislative Funding W �� Sa.� �c._ from the Minnesota De artme t f T d p no rae and Economic Development for the Trunk Highway 65 Highway Improvement Project Design Fees ............................. 50 - 59 NEW BUSINESS: �,lj C{ a 5:�� p� GtJ � C.�,�c� �'3�' �.tl S� � C�(v�— 10. �pecial Use Permit, SP #99-04, by Jeffrey � Vogel, Grace Evangelical Free Church, to Expand the Educational, Administrative, and Gymnasium Space of the Church, Generally Located at 755 — 73�d Avenue N.E. (Ward 1) .......................... . ... .. 60 — 72 �a J � �.b +o..`o (_a_. b.1�....s..�r. � � � 5-L. Co✓-vC'.� ��' 1-e. �.al rc � t� P�-r''�«y( C.�c� c� Gt` t ( � c:� Gl.t�� 11. Resolution Authorizing Application for Special �Q � l�� ,!�'� Legislative Funding from the Department of � ��' / ��`� Trade and Economic Development and �' � S Authorizing Execution of the Agreement (Trunk �� Highv�ray 65 Highway Improvement Project Design Fees) ..................................................... 73 - 74 p(�e..t.1.e c� ,� ;n.b ( i c:� �.ea n� t�t�' 12. First Reading of an Ordinance of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, Amending the City Code to Include a new Chapter 409, Entitled "Franchise Fees" ...................................................... 75 - 8(' �$ / (�t,J � � � � ..� :., c�—r�� i� S� � w�,v � ��,� �� ,��` Sf-"WG� l VJiJI . /T �.1� �� - � �� S�� n � , = �.= -_ = __ � _ = - . _ = =; � ,,,- _ _ _ ►� _ LAW ENFORCEMENT SUNDAY August 1, 1999 WHEREAS, the public safety is protected and preserved by fhe efforts of inen and women who serve in Law Enforcement in our local communities; and, WHEREAS, a police officer is in the forefronf of maintaining law and order, and takes personal risks in dealing with those who would threaten the peace of our communities; and, WHEREAS, Woodcrest Baptist Church has recognized the need to offer spiritual support and to honor our Law Enforcement departments throughout the North Metro area for their dedication and courage in performing their duties; and, WHEREAS, Woodcrest Baptist Church desires to express its gratitude for the outstanding performance of all local Law Enforcement personnel by honoring them on August 1, 1999. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that 1, Nancy J. Jorgenson, Mayor of the City of Fridley, do hereby proclaim that August 1, 1999, be in Fridley, Minnesota. LAW ENFORCEMENT SUNDAY IN WITNESS iNHEREDF, 1 have set my hand ar►d caused the seal of the City of Fridley to be affixed this 26th day of July, 1999. NANCY J. JORGENSON, MAYOR THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL OF JULY 12, 1999 The Regular Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order by Mayor Jorgenson at 7:36 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Jorgenson led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Jorgenson, Councilmember Barnette, Councilmember Billings, Councilmember Wolfe, and Councilmember Bolkcom MEMBERS ABSENT: None PROCLAMATION: Mayor Jorgenson proclaimed the 16`'' Annual National Night Out event as scheduled for Tuesday, August 3, 1999. Mayor Jorgenson explained that National Night Out provides a unique opportunity for Fridley to join forces with thousands of other communities for a unique crime prevention night. Mayor Jorgenson stated that it was essential that all citizens of Fridley be aware of the importance of crime prevention programs and the impact of their participation to fight crimes, drugs and violence. Mayor Jorgenson called upon all catizens of Fridley to participate in National Night Out on Tuesday, August 3, 1999. Ms. Rosie Griep, Public Safety Projects Coordinator, spoke regarding National Night Out. She introduced three of the Advisory Board members: Marylou and Byron Johnson and Mel Bolin. Ms. Griep explained that they were present to accept the proclamation and also to encourage the citizens of Fridley to be sure to register their neighborhood block party with the Police Department. The deadline for registration is July 23, 1999. The registration forms can be received by calling (612) 572-3638 or stopping at the Police Department. This year's theme will be Lights On Mean Lights Out on crime. Citizens of Fridley are encouraged to leave their lights on all night, particularly the exterior liglTts to light up the neighborhood to remove those dazk spots that allow criminals the opportunity to commit crimes. Council was invited to join in by visiting the neighborhoods on National Night. Ms. Griep and the Advisory Board members presented the Mayor and Councilmembers with official National Night Out t-shirts. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES• Citv Council Meetin�Minutes of June 14 1999 Councilmember Bolkcom requssted that Item No. 19 be conected to change the vote on the main motion. She stated that Councilmember Wolfe had voted no on this motion. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the regular City Council meeting minutes of June 14, 1999 as corrected. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, 1ViAYpR' JORGENSO�N DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Citv Council Meetin� Minutes of June 28 1999 MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the regular City Council meeting minutes of June 28, 1999 as presented in writing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL MEMBERS VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF PROP4SED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS: 1. RESOLUTION NO. 47-1999 APPROVING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF THE 200,000 SUBORDINATED SENIOR HOUSING REVENUE NOTE SERIES 1999 AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS RELATING THERETO BANFILL CROSSING HOMES PROJECTI 1�Ir. Burns, City Manager, explained that this item was for financing of the project known ---, as "Banfill Crossing Homes." The note would be issued to Senior Housing Construction, Inc., and would be payable solely from the projects net operating income. This note would only be paid after the payment of the debt service on the senior bonds. Staff recommended Council's approval: ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 47-1999. 2. APPOINTMENTS: Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that staff recommended the appointment of the following individuals: Carolyn Dreyer, Eugene Abel, and Jane Oster as Head Liquor Store Clerks. APPROVED THE APPOINTMENT OF CAROLYN DREYER, EUGENE ABEL, AND JANE OSTER AS HEAD LIQUOR STORE CLERKS. TFIE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 3 3. CLAIMS:_ APPROVED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NUMBERS 87914 THROUGH 88185. 4. LICENSES: APPROVED LICENSES AS SUBMITTED. 5. ESTIMATES: APPROVED ESTIMATES AS FOLLOWS: Frederic W. Knaak, Esq. Holstad and Knaak, P.L.C. 3535 Vadnais Center Drive St. Paul, MN 55110 Services Rendered as City Attorney For the Month of June, 1999 $ 5,000.00 Ron Kassa Construction 6005 — 250`� Street East Elico, NIT155020 1999 Miscellaneous Concrete Curb and Gutter and Sidewalk Project No. 322 Estimate No. 4 $ 2,199.25 Park Construction Co. 7900 Beech Street N.E. Fridley, MN 55432-1795 Riverview Heights Area Improvement Project No. ST. 1999 —1 Estimate No. 3 " $ 311,158.63 Mayor Jorgenson asked if there were any questions from the public on any of the items. No persons in the audience spoke regarding the proposed consent agenda. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the consent agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL NIEETING OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 4 ADOPTION OF AGENDA: Councilmember Billings proposed to add an item to the agenda. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to post the vacancy on the Cable Commission. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. _ __ UPON A VOICE YOTE, ALL VO�'ING AYE, MA�4R JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIEI� UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilxnember Bolkcom to approve the adoption of the-agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE N10TION CARRIET� UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM VISITORS: Mr. James Kimber, 221 Mercury Drive N.E., spoke regarding his concern on the proposed utility franchise fee. Mayor Jorgenson explained that his concern could be addressed during the public hearing that would be .opening up in the next feu- minutes. No other persons in the audience spoke during Open Forum. PUBLIC HEARING: 6. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY MINNESOTA AMENDING THE CITY CODE TO INCLUDE A NEW CHAPTER 409 ENTITLED ��FRANCHISE FEE:" MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to open the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. ' UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION� GARRIED UNAI�IMOUSLY AII�TTI� TI�E PUBLIC kIE�RING WAS OPENED AT 7:47 P.M. Mr. Burns, City Manager, explained that the franchise fee was essentially a sales tax on utility bills. It was the City's proposal, not the utility companies proposal. The amount of the franchise fee averages up to $3.00 per month for the average residential utility customer. The industrial customer charge would be a flat fee based on an average bill in the various Northern States Power (NSP) and Minnegasco customer categories. The fees for particular categories are subject to limits to ensure that the users in any category do not pay a disproportionately high fee. The THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF 3ULY 12 1999 PAGE 5 City was not interested in having a small user pay a disproportionate percentage of their bill to franchise fees. The franchise fees would generate an estimated $716,000 per year for the City. Mr. Burns explained that the City needed the franchise fee to balance the General Fund budget. Since 1994 the City has had a number of new programs due to changing conditions in the City. The franchise fee would help the City pay for tw� new police officers that were added in 1999. The franchise fee would enable the City to cover the cost of housing inspections, the Fridley Community Center, and the Hayes gymnasium among other expenses. The fee would also offset the impacts of class rate changes in local property taxes. During the past two years the tax capacity rate for all Fridley property has dropped by more than 12 percent. The City is facing a crunch because the City's costs have been going up, and there have only been two small increases in property ta�ces within the last ten years. The Medtronic project and other recent developments in Fridley have necessitated the additional purchase of firefighting equipment in the future. Councilmember Billings stated that in the proposed franchise legislation, there are unclear definitions for the classification of the housing units. He stated that there should be understandable definitions in the ordinance itself. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, explained that the reference to the current enforceable agreement that was contained in the proposed ordinance with NSP and Minnegasco was sufficiently specific. Mr. Knaak stated that it was possible to modify the ordinance. As a general rule, it was probably a good idea to reference specifically the agreement but not necessarily to recite specific parts of it. Mr. John Thies, NSP Representative, spoke regarding the definitions. Councilmember Billings stated that he thought the category definitions could be defined more clearly and be more understandable. Mr. A1 Swintek, Minnegasco, stated that single family duplexes and quad homes have individual meters. Larger apartment complexes are considered commercial categories. Mr. Swintek stated that the primary obligation of Minnegasco was to make sure that the customers understand where the fees are coming from and how they will impact them. Communication was important, and Mr. Swintek was very appreciative of the eity's effort to be very informative with the newsletter. Mr. Burns asked if there would be any harm in attaching ±he definitiot�,s Council received and incorporating them into the ordinance. Mr. Knaak said there would be no harm in being more clear and that attachments to ordinances was a regular practice. Mr. Knaak said there is no harm in being more clear and that attachments to ordinances was a regular practice. . THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 6 Mr. John Haluska, 5660 Arthur Street, spoke regarding his concerns about the franchise fee. Mr. . Haluska stated.that he contacted Mr. Burns, City Manager, on this issue a couple of weeks ago and was surprised on the comment from Mr. Swintek saying that he had worked with Mr. Burns for six months on this issue. Mr. Haluska stated that he asked Mr. Burns via voice mail for the meeting minutes relating to this particular issue. Mr. Haluska stated that Mr. Burns responded via voice mail that there were no meeting minutes because the franchise fee had been developed by City staff. Mr. Haluska stated that he felt there could have been some opportunity to give the . -- public a little better warning during the six months the City had been v�corki�g, on it. Mr. Haluska stated that the franchise fee was a poor response to poor planning. He felt this was a poorly conceived revenue raising mechanism that has been executed poorly. T.he City was relying on the utility companies to define who was going to pay what and the. d�finitions . are unclear for residential or industrial. He stated that he did not like the fact that the City was transferring funds from one taxpayer to another. He indicated that with r�espect to the hardship rule, he_was a great one for charity but he thought it should be up front and clear. He felt that one of the greatest mistakes they are making was using the poverty threshold. He believed that most of the poorer taxpayers in the City of Fridley were probably above that, but they are still struggling. Mr. Haluska indicated that he believed the City was taxing a category he felt was really a necessity and taxing the necessity for general revenue. Mr. Haluska was really surprised that because of the Medtronic development, the taxpayers of the City of Fridley could expect to pay more taxes. He felt that should be a revenue-generating deal, not one that costs the residents money. He said it was wonderful to have Medtronic in Fridley, and the City did a great job of putting that project together, but there should have been more foresight. He also felt that a lot of the different areas of activity the City l�anager outlined for revenue are perks and unnecessary. Mr. Haluska stated that the City should stick to those categories of revenue raising where people clearly understand where the money is coming from and where it is going. He felt raising revenue by taxing a necessity like power and gas was a big mistake, and he was disappointed by the turnout tonight. He felt it was probably a done deal, and he was probably speaking to closed minds, but he appreciated having the opportunity to speak. He thanked Council. Mayor Jorgenson thanked Mr. Haluska for coming to the meeting. ., Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Burns if there was a previous public hearing regarding the franchise agreement. Mr. Burns stated that the City left that open as a possibility. There was a public hearing and two readings of th� franchise ordinance this spring. It-was recognized at that time that the franchise :� fee could be done at a later point in time. The City newsletter also included notice of the franchise fee, and the public hearing scheduled for this evening. Mr. Haluska stated that he was Chairman of the Anoka County Library Board and he has dealt with revenue issues. He said he does not deny that the City was between a rock and a hard place, but this was the wrong response. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Haluska his opinion on how he felt the City should generate revenue. THE MPIUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL NiEETING OF JULY 12,1999 PAGE 7 Mr. Haluska stated he felt the City could generate revenue by raising property taxes and cutting the City's expenses. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if that does not hurt everyone that owns property. Mr. Haluska stated that it was transparent. People know where the money is coming from, and they know where it is going. The City was taking money from a particular use; electrical power and gas use, and throwing it into the general revenue for a whole lot of different things. It was not clear where it was going. He felt the City was opening the door on sales tax in the City of Fridley. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the City could only implement a sales tax if the State legislature allowed it to. Mr. Haluska stated that having opened the door, the City would put it everywhere they coulc find it. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the tax was taxing everyone in the City of Fridley not just those who are paying property taxes. Mr. Haluska stated that he was not interested in taxing the school district because he would be taxing himself. He was not interested in taxing the churches, because that too would be a double tax. Mr. James Kimber, at 221 Mercury Drive, spoke regarding his issues with the franchise fee. He was concerned that it appeared that every time they have an opportunity to see t�es go down, someone finds an opportunity to raise taxes elsewhere. The State legislature was trying to hold down property taxes but at the same time was finding other ways to tax people anyway. He questioned if this was a long-term solution to diversify the tax base. He felt it would be another fixture in the taxes, and people will eventually forget about it. He stated that he was unaware the crime rate in the City was 3ncreasing, and there was additional need for police officers. He thought the Medtronic project and the further development at 53`� and University Avenues would be additional revenue for the City. He said he was also concerned about the fact that the City was currently spending more than what it was actually taking in. He believed that the City needed to look at where the money was being spent and differentiate between need versus other benefits to Fridley residents. He mentioned that there was recently a bond referendum for education and that this was another, thing residents w�uld be paying for. Mr. Kimber .thanked .• Council for their time. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the new developments, including Medtronic, Home Depot and other areas of improvements are within tax increment financing districts. The taxes that the City of Fridley was bringing in from those particular properties are the taxes that were paid pre- development before these changes were made. The new taxes that are being brought in from that development are going to the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority and can actually help to pay off some of the bond issues associated with those projects. She indicated that the City of Fridley does not see any increase in those taxing areas until the expiration of the tax THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 12, 1999 PAGE 8 increment financing district. She stated that a portion of Medtronic will come off in 2012 and the balance of it in 2025, so it will be a long time off before the City Council would see any generated increases in taxes. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the City's expenses are not remaining static. They continue to go up with the cost of employees and insurance benefits. - She stated that thexevenues arriving from the State of Minnesota are not going up. She stated that she felt the City needed to stabilize the ta�c base. She stated that there- was not a lot of new development areas where there would be additional moneys coming in. She indicated that Fridley was an older community and was starting to decline. There have been soxne decreases in different types of crime in the City, as youth have become involved in more programs at the community center and other areas as well. Mr. Kimber asked if the City knew how much the services were being used. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that for example, there are monthly and weekly reports for the drop-off center where the police officers drop off youth picked up for curfew violations. There are kids with problems with social issues, smoking, drinking, kids with nobody at home to take care of them, and kids who are runaways. She said the Police Department spends a lot of time dealing with these problems. Mr. Kimber stated that there was a bigger picture beyond that which he has an issue with. The reason why there is nobody home to supervise these kids is that everybody is always working to try to pay taxes. He also stated that he would like somebody to address the long-term plan for the franchise fee. Mr. Burns stated that in order to approve the franchise fee ordinance, there must be a four-fifths vote of Council. There are limits on the percentage that the City can charge, and they are included in the franchise agreement. Mr. Burns stated that the combination of flat fees and residential percentages may not be any greater than four percent of Fridley revenues. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that ther� would have �o �e another public hearing to raise the percentages. Mr. Burns stated that Council was very reluctant to raise revenues of any kind. They have had one property tax increase in the last eighfyears. Recently, they returned part of the recycling fee because they cut out the redemption center. Mr. Burns stated that he felt Council was looking after the public's interest: � Councilmember Bolkcom stated that Council was looking at whether they could decrease the sewer rates also. Mr. Kimber stated that he was not sure if it was the best approach to diversify in this manner. As a resident, he would like to see the property tax go up. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the problem with that was if you own a piece of �property that was not income driven. The City continually hears from residents who are saying they are retired and THE MINUTES OF TAE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 9 on disability income, and do not have the ability to pay additional fees. They request that their property taxes not be raised. The franchise fees are based on needs. If you are a low end user of utility fees, you would pay less. The people who use more would pay more. Mr. Burns stated that the crime rates fluctuate quite a bit. He stated that one of the new police officers was in the middle schools, and one planned to be hired next year would be in the high school. One was also part of an area-wide drug task force. One was working with apartment people in Fridley. Police officers are typically assigned to problem areas the City sees as having particular needs. Mr. Kimbers thanked Council for the clarification. Mayor Jorgenson explained that police officers rotate over two shifts and work a twelve-hour shift per day. They have specific neighborhoods they work in to help resolve issues. Mr. Kimber asked what the long-term plan for the franchise fee was. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the long-term plan for the franchise fee was that it would probably stay there unless they entered into a new franchise agreement with the utility companies. Mr. Burns stated he thought the City would be examining the franchise fees every year while preparing the budget. He said the fee would be evaluated as the expenditures are looked at and a determination made as to whether it was still needed. Mayor Jorgenson asked if the sales tax paid on the cable bill or utility bills or telephone bills that goes to the State of Minnesota goes back to the General Fund. N�r. Knaak stated that the State taxes do go into the General Fund. Mayor Jorgenson stated that she envisioned that what the City would do was to redistribute revenues if they are over and above what the City needs and not just stick it into their pockets and walk away. Mr. Knaak stated that, technically speaking; the franchise fee was not a sales tax. Mr. Tom Determan, Determan Brownie Inc., stated that his 190 employees bring a lot of revenue into the City. He asked if the true value of a property was not taxed until well after .the improvements were made. Mayor Jorgenson responded that the true value of the property was not returned by the City. It remains in the Housing and Redevelopment Authority's Tax Increment District. Mr. Determan asked what rate Medtronic would pay if they took two years to build a$100 million facility: He asked if they would be ta}ced right away or after the two years when the building is completed. � THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 10 Mayor Jorgenson stated that Medtronic would be taxed at that rate and the money would go back into the HRA. Mr. Burns stated that some of that money is distributed back into the development for eligible costs associated with that development. Fridley's incentive to have Medtronic build in Fridley was to help them pay for their parking ramp so they would stay in the City. Councilmember Billings stated that:the HRA assumed certain costs to make the land costs of that : site competitive with the land costs of other cities to encourage growth in Fridley. Mr. Determan stated that the rest of the businesses have to make up the difference. Councilmember Billings stated that essentially the City was not making up the difference: The taxes that the City receives are the same taxes that would be there if the project had not gone in until such time as the HFcA would be able to recapture their expenses. After they have done so in the year 2025 there would be (in 1999 dollars sense) about $6 million of taxes per year to be divided between the school district, the county, and the City. In the very short term, unti12025 the City would only see something like $100,000 of that when the property goes back on the tax rolls and then only see $150,000 to $175,000 per year until 2025. One of the expenses was to add another firefighter, not just for Medtronic but for all of the other development that is going on. Mr. Determan stated that the citizens of Fridley would see a lot of the expenses well before 2025. Councilmember Billings stated that there was no guarantee that there are going to be additional expenses that are related directly to City services to Medtronic. Mr. Determan stated that he thought the tax increment financing sounded like a discount to a large corporation to come to Fridley to develop so that in future years Fridley can generate more tax revenue. He stated that there are wide-open opportunities to increase the franchise fee calling it franchise fee flexibility. Mr. Burns explained that was not what was meant by the term flexibility. Flexibility meant if needs are on the horizon the City coulc address the top priorities year to year basis. It does not mean the fee will be raised. ' Councilmember Bolkcom comment�d that commercial property keeps all -residential property taxes down. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the amount of revenue generated from single family homes in Fridley back to the City would probably be less than what they pay for garbage service. The City has a particularly difficult time trying to obtain the different types of services with all of the costs escalating as well. Mr. Determan stated that his company was a welding company that uses a lot of electricity. He did not know what his company was classified as or what his rate would be. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL NIEETI�TG OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 11 Mr. Burns stated that he did not have information on how many kilowatts Mr. Determan's company uses. Mr. Determan stated that he did nct have that information with him either, and there was a serious lack of information regarding classifications. Mr. Determan asked why the recycling center was closed. Mayor Jorgenson stated that the recycling center was closed because there were very few people using it, and it was not profitable. Councilmember Bolkcom stated that needed improvements to the recycling center would have cost around $50,000. The building was also deteriorating. Ms. 3an Hammerstrom, 6931 East River Road, stated her concerns were similar to Mr. Determan's. She asked if the percentage fee would go up if the franchise fee was renegotiated. Mayor Jorgenson stated that there was a potential that it could go up, but at the time the franchise fee would be renegotiated, there would have to be a public hearing. Mr. Burns stated that the franchise fee was a twenty-year agreement. Ms. Hammerstrom stated that she understood the City was proposing the franchise fee because they were unable to raise taxes. She asked if the franchise fee would be eliminated after the City is allowed to raise property taxes. Councilmember Billings stated that it was not that the City was unable to raise property taxes. In twelve years property ta�ces have been raised only twice. The City has been trying to control the budget, and a number of things were eliminated in the last five years. The legislature keeps tinkering with real estate values. Currently, the City has sixty percent of the value in single family residential homes. Thirty percent is in commercia? and industrial. Right now, however, thirty percent of the actual ta�c collected is single family homes, and sixty percent is coming from commercial and industrial. The legislature is currently bringing down the rates that commercial and industrial pay and bringing up residential rates. The City was looking at trying to diversify our businesses. The franchise fee was not intended to be an additional tax or a replacement of anything. Ms. Hammerstrom asked if the franchise fee would be reduced or eliminated if property taxes did go up? Councilmember Billings explained that with the use of the franchise fee, the City could better control real estate t�es so they would not have to go up by an amount equal to what was being collected on the franchise fee. Councilmember Barnette explained that there was not a sunset clause for the franchise fee. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 12 Ms. Hammerstrom asked if the franchise fee money would be going into the general fund. She also asked where the money would come from to pay for burying all of the telephone cables if that would come to pass in the future. Councilmember Barnette stated that he assumed if that happened, the utility company itself would have to bear that cost and do it by raising the telephone rates. That would not affeet us. Ms. Hammerstrom thanked Council. Mayor Jorgenson asked if any other members in the audience had any questions. No other members spoke. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:03 P.M. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what would what happen next with the process of the franchise fee. Mr. Burns stated that the franchise fee could be in effect by the middle of October or the Nevember billing. 6A. APPOINTMENT TO THE FRIDLEY CABLE TELEVISION AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMISSION: Mayor Jorgenson stated that there were two applications to fill the Cable Television and Telecommunications Advisory Commission vacancy. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to appoint Dianne McKusick to the Cable Television and Telecommunications Advisory Commission. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMQUSI.Y. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS: Councilmember Bolkcom stated with respect to the Craig Way Estates signs issue, the City was still waiting for a response from Mike Daly from Anoka County. Hopefully, before the end of the week, homeowners in the area will receive an information letter regarding the signs. Councilmember Barnette commented that on September 18 there would be a birthday celebration for the City of Fridley at the Fridley Community Center. THE MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 12 1999 PAGE 13 Ms. Lillian Meyer, League of Women Voters, spoke regarding the 50`� Anniversary time capsule. Ms. Meyer commented that if anyone wanted to bring anything for the time capsule they could bring it to the Municipal Center or call her at (612) 571-5328. The safe will be sealed for 25 years. The time capsule needs a variety of business cards. Sealed in the safe will also be Fridley telephone books and newspapers, beanie babies, a cellular telephone, and a laptop computer. All of these items will be spread out near the time capsule in September. Ms. Meyer also stated that the Fridley Historical Society Museum Open House will be on Saturday, August 7 from 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Included will be the tornado exhibit. Councilmember Wolfe stated that he, his sister, and other family members appreciate all the support they received from Mr. Burns, City staff and members of the Council during the recent illness and death of his father. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn the meeting at 9:17 p.m. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAJOR JORGENSON DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE JULY 12, 1999 MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL WAS ADJOURNED AT 9:17 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Signe L. Johnson Nancy J. Jorgenson Recording Secretary Mayor CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, JULY 7,_.�999 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the July 7, 1999, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Diane Savage, Dave_Kondrick, Connie Modig, Brad: Sielaff, Dean Saba Members Absent: LeRoy Oquist, Larry Kuechle Others Present: Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant Ross Larson, 1568 Gardena Avenue Sue Wick, 1565 Gardena Avenue Carla Winiecki, 5950 Benjamin Street Bailey Tiller, 1535 Gardena Avenue Erika Kuhlmeyer, 1564 Gardena Avenue Carol & Cory Wilson, 1588 Gardena Avenue Michele Hatten, 5955 Benjamin Street Barbara & James Sweeney, 7320 Jackson Street Rich Revering, 7300 Jackson Stree�t Roger & Lavona Carlson, 7385 Memory Lane Victoria Friedmann, 1541 60�' Avenue NE Scott Roberts, Genesis Architects Marj Rolland, 1561 Gardena Avenue Bob Neal, 1561 Gardena Avenue E. T. Lane, 1132 Mississippi Street Monica Lane, 3451 —1215t Avenue NW, Coon Rapids, Minnesota Jean Hicks, 106 Hartman Circle Julie Hunstad, 7664 Jackson Street Bernice Tumer, 7601 Jackson Street Jeff Ledin, 10678 Washington Boulevard, Blaine, Minnesota Greig Manthei, 965 83�d Aven�e NE, Spring Lake Park, Minnesota Kenneth Johnson, 7430 Tempo Terrace Steve Varichak, 1558 Brierdale Road James Surdyk, 6415 Eagle Lake Drive Hank & Rosemarie Melcher, 6500 Pierce Street Dr. Larry Lucas, 3380 Xylon Avenue N. Clayton Hicks, 106 Hartman Circle Roland Peterson, 235 Craigbrook Way Jerome Tiller, 1555 Gardena Avenue 1 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 APPROVAL OF JUNE 2. 1999, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: PAG E 2 MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr: Sielaff, to approve the June 2, 1999, Planning Commission minutes as presented. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT G:S. #99-01 BY MONICA LANE: To split the North'/2 of Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision #88, generally located at 1132 Mississippi Street: MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick to op�n the public hearing. IiPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL=�FOTING A,YE, CHAlRP�RS�JN SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 7:34 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioner is requesting a lot split of the north one-half of Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision #88, to construct an additional single family home. The property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Highway 65 and Mississippi Street, generally known as 1132 Mississippi Street. The property is currently 1.04 acres in size and is zoned R-1, Single Family, as are all the immediate surrounding properties. Further to the south of this property is property zoned R-3, General Multiple Units, and apartment buildings zoned R-2, Two-Family Units. Mr. Bolin stated the new lot would be created just to the east of the existing driveway. Once the lot is split, the existing lot with the home will measure 85 feet x 239 feet. The newly created lot will be 75 feet x 239 feet. Both lots meet the minimum code requirements for lot size. The existing home will still meet all of the required setbacks as well as the new home being proposed. The existing home was built prior to 1949. In 1949, the garage was built on the site. In 1952 and in 1962, the home had some additions made to it. Mr. Bolin stated, since the lots will exceed the required size standards, staff recommends approval of the request with the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall extend current 10-foot easement along the entire Western boundary. 2. Petitioner shall pay $750 park dedication fee for new lot prior to issuance of building permit. 3. Petitioner shall grant code required 12-foot utility and drainage easement along Southern boundary of property. 4. Petitioner shall pay all water and sewer connection fees. 5. Petitioner shall record a 12-foot driveway easement along both sides of common boundary. . 6. The current 15-foot private easement along Eastern boundary of property shall be vacated, or new home and accessory building shall be set back 15 feet from the eastern boundary so as to not encroach into the easement. � PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 3 7. Petitioner shall meet all right-of-way dedication requirements of Anoka County for that portion of each lot that abuts Mississippi Street. 8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible: :A1� trees required to be removed for the new house shall be marked and approve�t by City staff prior to issuance of the building permit. Mr. Bolin stated many of the items in the stipulations have already been addressed by the petitioner's engineers including the 15-foot easement along the western boundary, the 12-foot driveway easements, as well as a 12-foot drainage'and utility easement along the south edge of the property. Ms. Modig asked if staff had received comments from the neighbors. Mr. Bolin stated staff has received four calls. All of the callers wanted to know about the plans. There was some fear that by splitting the lot, a convenience store or gas station might go in. The zoning is R-1, Single Family, and this is all that can go in there. Ms. Monica Lane stated her father raised a family in that home. He is now alone. The family believed this would allow their father to continue to be an active member of the community. He is a member of St. Luke's Church, participates in senioFS' programs, does many things for the neighbors and elderly people, has a carving class, and would like to stay in the community. However, he will not always be able to keep up this lot alone. Many of the children live out of state. Two children live within forty miles. It is very hard to have their families and try to care for this yard at the same time. Since she was in the process of trying to find a lot on which to build a home, she believed this would be a practical solution and allow her father to stay in his home. SF�e graduated from Fridley High School. She likes the neighborhood. It will mean that she will have to relocate her family. Mr. Sielaff asked if the petitioner had any problems with the stipulations. Ms. Lane stated she is confused about some things. One is the 15-foot easement on the eastern side. When she went to the courthouse, she discovered that, at one time, this was a dirt driveway that was the access to the home behind them about 35-40 years ago. Since she can remember, this area has been fenced by the neighbors and totally closes off the easement. If she does build a home, it is unrealistic to keep the home 15 feet from that easement and 10 feet from the driveway without butting into it. She would like to have the easement removed, because it serves absolutely no purpose. Mr. Hickok stated that the parties involved could have it removed from the plat. This is a private easement on file at Anoka County. This property and the other current property owner could come to an agreemerit and have that done. Mr. Hickok stated the City and County would prefer that this not become a driveway also because the property now takes access from the frontage road to the south and has done so for a number of years. The petitioner's property is at a very critical point for bringing driveways out onto Mississippi. That is why staff recommended a driveway � PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 4 easement location of 12 feet on either side of the line. That gives the opportunity for a driveway for each lot while controlling the number of access points. Ms. Lane stated that on the survey she had done, the existing driveway goes into what would be the newly created lot. If a driveway were to be put in, it would have to be to the right of that or to the east. Of the homes across the street, one has a driveway and another has finro driveways. Her father would prefer that she have her own driveway to avoid any problems in the future. She is trying to realistically thi�k of fioYnr one person would come in off one driveway and veer off. If a driveway were to be put in, it wouid have to be put in to the east of the existing driveway. That driveway goes onto the newly created parcel. She does not know how to go about.correcting that: Mr. Hickok stated this is staff's recommendation in an effort to control access at a critical point of the roadway. This is an area where cars could be traveling at the _ Highway 65 speed and rounding the corner at a green light only to find there are nearby driveways, causing conflict. Since th�s is a famil�,situation, it �s staff's recor�mer�dation - to create a driveway location that is deemed appropriate for the lot split and still control the number of access points. Staff does understand that the current driveway crosses over onto the newly created lot, but that is not an unusual situation. There are a number of properties in the City that share access butthen split once they gain access to their property. The concern is at the easement. Beyond the easement, the owner can do what he/she wants. Ms. Lane asked if the easement at the westem boundary is by the highway. Mr. Bolin stated this is correct. The 15-foot easement is an existing easement. The engineering staff asked that this be extended along the entire length of the property. Mr. Melcher stated he lives two blocks from this site. If the lot is split, what is the possibility of commercial on the new lot? Directly across the street from this parcel is land that was set up as residential. When the owner had difficulty selling it, he petitioned the City to change this to commercial in order to put in a gas station and a pizza place. It was part of the pocket zoning thing. His concern is that this is another pocket zoning problem. If this goes residential, but the Lanes do not build another house and the property goes up for sale, what is the possibility of this being rezoned commercial? Mr. Bolin stated the property is currently zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, as are the surrounding properties. The plot across the street is still zoned R-1. The possibility of this becoming commercial is very slim. Currently, the City is updating the comprehensive land use plan. In this update, that area is designated as residential. Mr. Melcher stated that part of Mississippi and Highway 65 is a very severe accident prone area. He did not have statistics, but he felt the police department could vouch for the fact that. If commercial was put in there, it would be a real mess. Ms. Lane stated it would be her worst nightmare to relocate her family, build a home, and find out that this was zoned commercial. She is making the request to build a hor�e to help keep the area residential and to keep her dad in his home. 0 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 5 Mr. Hickok stated that when the City evaluates a rezoning, staff looks at criteria that the request would have to meet in order to get a recommendation for approval. One of those criteria is the surrounding zoning. He believed the City Councit is committed to keeping this area residential. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to close the public hearing. UPON A V�ICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE �'��:LARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT.7:56 P.M. Mr. Saba stated he has no problem with the request. Mr. Kondrick agreed. He believed the petitioner understood the sti�ulations. MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Ms. Modig, to recommend approval of Lot Split request, L.S. #99-01, by Monica Lane, to split the North'/Z of Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision #88, generally located at 1132 Mississippi Street, with the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall extend current 10-foot easement along the entire Westem boundary. 2. Petitioner shall pay $750 park dedication fee for new lot prior to issuance of building permit. 3. Petitioner shall grant code required 12-foot utility and drainage easement along Southern boundary of property. 4. Petitioner shall pay all water and sewer connection fees. 5. Petitioner shall record a 12-foot driveway easement along both sides of common boundary. 6. The current 15-foot private easement along Eastern boundary of property shall be vacated or new home and accessory buildings to be setback 15 feet from the eastern boundary so as to not encroach into the easement. 7. Petitioner shall meet all right-of-way dedication requirements of Anoka County for that portion of each lot that abuts Mississippi Street. 8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new house shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of the building permit. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Bolin stated this item would be considered by the City Council on July 26. 2. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF REPLAT REQUEST, #99-03. BY STEPHEN VARICHAK & JAMES SURDYK: To create three separate lots from Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92, generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick to open the public hearing. � PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 6 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT��:58 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated the petitioner is requesting a replat of Lot 2, Auditor's Subdivision #92, to develop three separate lots which would accommodate three single family homes on the property located at 1583 Gardena. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family, as are the surrounding properties with the exception of a small parcel just to the south of°this property. A 40-foot strip of land is owned by the City and used as access into the Park for maintenance. A home and a number of large trees currently exist on the property, The northernmost edge of the property is:lower than the other part of�the pcoperty: Mr. Bolin stated the lot was platted in 1949: 1n 1956, the existing home was constructed. In 1976, the exis#ing fiome was connected to :City sewer and water.- - Mr. Bolin stated tha# in-reviewing the prelimiraary plat,-�taf# has noted that the prflposed lots exceed the code requirements for size and street frantage. Staff recommends approval of the request with the following stipulations: 1. . Grading and. drainage plan shall be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the Northern most edge of property. 2. Petitioner shall provide a 20-foot drainage and utility easement along North property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50-feet of the North �roperty line of proposed Lot 1. 4. Petitioner shall provide proof that the old well located on the site is properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner shall pay $750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant code required 12-foot utility and drainage easement along western boundary of property. 8. Petitioner shall pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. Mr. Bolin stated the northernmost lot, Lot 1, would be approximately 17,OQ0 square feet, Lot 2 would be ab�ut 11,000 square feet, and Lot 3 would be just ov�er 12;000 square feet. Lot 1 acts as a natural drainage area. The 20-foot easement would give the City a drainage easement in that area. Also, to address some of the neighborhood concerns with drainage and open space, staff has requested a stipulation stating that no land alterations shall happen within 50 feet of the no�thernmost property line. Ms. Savage asked why this is a replat rather than a lot split. Mr. Bolin stated this is because there are three lots involved. This is a reconfiguring of the entire site rather than splitting one parcel into two parcels. 0 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAG E 7 Ms. Savage asked if there were any legal guidelines or statutes in a situation like this where it is clear that these lots are the proper size. Are there any other guidelines in making a recommendation to approve or deny? Mr. Bolin stated staff goes by the City zoning code to make sure that all the lots will be buildable. Not only must the lots meet certain size requirements, but also that homes can be built on the lots. This is a residential area, and these will be single family homes. According to the code, the petitioners can do this and meet the requirements. Ms. Savage asked for staff's response to the letter from Glenn Lillmars indicating that he owns an adjoining property that he wanted to build on and that he was nofi abte #o build. Mr. Bolin stated he believed Mr. Lillmars' property abuts this property_and was at one time platted even though they do not have access. About the same time, a 25-foot portion of the proposed Hill Drive was also platted. It is highly unlikely that Hil! Driue---- -- will be extended due to the topographic constraints. In order to construct Hill Drive, it would be necessary to fill in the entire low area, which would cause drainage problems for the entire area. There would also be issues in acquiring property in order to put in a road. The City code requires 60-foot roadways with 30 feet of paved surface and 15 -� feet of right-of-way on either side. It is landlocked and without some major purchases of property, it would be impossible to come off Benjamin onto Hill Drive. Mr. Kondrick asked the minimum lot size. Mr. Bolin stated the minimum lot size is 9,000 square feet. Ms. Modig asked why the lots are not being separated into equal size lots. Mr. Bolin stated the main reason is that, when the petitioner was drawing up the lots, he was thinking about the low area at the nothernmost lot. In order to make that a buildable lot, he made the northernmost lot larger than the other finro. Ms. Modig stated that once this subdivision is done, what prevents the future owner from making a topographic change in that low area? Mr. Bolin stated a future owner would need a grading permit. There is a storm sewer culvert that goes under Benjamin just to the north of this property. That drainage comes partially across the neighbor's property. Practically, this would not be a possibility. Mr. Hickok stated there is a stipulation that sfiates the subdivision was approved under certain conditions. If this was filled, it would be a violation of the law. Mr. Saba stated that in walking the property, it appears there is wetland soil at the northemmost area. Has anyone looked at whether there is wetland material and if there is mitigation involved? f1 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 8 Mr. Bolin stated he understands that the water does not set in the area very Iong and drains quickly. Any potential wetland in the area would be small enough in size that it would not trigger any mitigation. The area lacks wetland vegetation. Mr. Saba stated the lot located north of Lot 1 has severe erosion. What will _ construction do to that property as well as othe�? Will removing trees and vegetation add to that? Mr. Bolin stated that in reviewing this with the City engineers, they are confident that the 50-foot buffer along the northern edge and engineering staff having final approval of the grading plans would stop any potential problems with erosion and runoff. Anything done on Lot 1 should not affect the praperty to the north: Mr. Saba asked where the house would be located: lFilr. Bolin stated a house would have to be lecated cn the �ou#hem-portian of �ot 1-a# a place where they would meet the required setbacks and still stay away from that 50- foot line. Mr. Sielaff asked if the former sewage treatment systems had been properly abandoned. Mr. Bolin stated that if there is one, it will be removed when the existing home is razed. This is a requirement of the demolition permit. _ Ms. Modig stated that where is th� drainage going to go? Mr. Bolin stated the engineering staff would like to see all the drainage go toward Benjamin. Ms. Modig stated that when the grading and drainage plan is approved, the idea is that it is going to drain away from the property itself into Benjamin. There is drainage further to the north. Will it accommodate this? Mr. Bolin stated those are all good concerns and are things that the engineering staff has looked at. The engineering staff does not want to allow any more drainage into that area, and they believe this will work. Ms. Modig stated she understands that. These are concerns of the nei�hborhood tha# have to be addressed for the neighborhood in order for it to be a peaceful project. She has concerns about that. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive into the public record letters received from Vicki Hamilton dated July 6, 1999; from James Hamilton dated July 6, 1999; and from Marjorie Rolland dated June 27, 1999. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. : PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 9 Mr. Varichak stated he lives three blocks away and has lived there for the last 15 years. He is very familiar with the property. He is looking at this for investment purposes. They will remove the old house and build three new ones. It will improve the area. He purchased the property a few months ago. The lots are all nice sized lots. At this time, he has two people interested in building on the lots. Ms. Savage asked if the petitioner had any problems with the stipulations. Mr. Varichak stated he has no problems. They made the northern lot big in order#o accommodate the landscaping. That is a nice walkout lot. They will try to save as: many trees as possible. Mr. Saba asked where he would put a house on Lot 1. Mr. Varichak stated they would have to mark where 50 feet is from the north end. It is really the buyer's option to posi±ion the house. They will pick out a plan and see if it is -,-- � a good fit for the lot. Currently, there are no plans. Ms. Winiecki stated she is attending the meeting on behalf of the three owners directly north of the three proposed lots. Cathy Miller and Thomas Steifer wrote a letter to the City regarding the request, which was included in the agenda packet. Ms. Winiecki read portions of the letter. Ms. Winiecki stated the homeowners she is representing purchased their lots primarily because of the scenery. Throughout the years, the entire neighborhood has enjoyed the natural setting tucked away in a big city. It appears to her the developer will come into the neighbo�hood, create a less than desirable area for the existing homeowners, and exit the scene without regard for the current residents. Surely, in this case, the developer will benefit. In what way will the existing property owners benefit? Will they enjoy looking at the sides or backs of the homes he built rather than taking in the beauty of the oak trees or open areas? Will they enjoy the loss of some of the wildlife in the area? Will they enjoy the additional traffic or homes being created? Will their property values go down? Most importantly, if this lot is lost to subdivision, will the next home that is sold then allow for an additional subdivision? Surely some of the lots are large enough to entice another developer? In order to protect the current residents, they need to stop this subdivision from taking place. The current homeowners like the neighborhood as it is. There is no question a developer with significant capital can subdivide the lot, take away the essence of the neighborhood, and make a hefty profit. The real question is, should they be allowed to? Ms. Wick stated she lives on the property immediately west of this property. Her entire property borders the property in question. There are a couple of things going on. One is the emotional aspect of cutting down trees. There are 24 oak trees are on the site. When stepping out her back door on a sunny day, she sees trees that are green. She will now look at siding, and she is not sure how she feels about that. She displayed a diagram showing finro trees and she thought that was about the perimeter. The perimeter holds about two trees. With three houses, there will be three families, four to nine kids, six or more cars, RV's, boats, etc., instead of all these really nice oak trees. That is the emotional piece. r, �� PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAG E 10 Ms. Wick stated the other part is about it being problematic. The Commission asked great questions. What about the erosion? What about the drainage?��-Can you put a house on that big lot? Is it going to change the drainage� Can ou ex ect that there � Y P will not be erosion when it is occurring now on the property to the north? She was not sure these questions were answered. Her concern is how the Planning Cammission can make a decision until they know those answers from the engineers? If inembers have not been to the site, she would invite them to come out and walk the lot. St�e :� loves the trees and thought they were over 100 years old. Ms. Wick stated she has spoken with Mr. Varichak. He seemed Iike a nice man. While he does live in the neighborhood, he does not live next door.. She is wil(ing to accept some compromise. Maybe she does not have a choice, but she and her neighbors are willing to take a look at a compromise = perhaps finro houses rather than three to save more trees. At the slope, there is a pocket of eight or nine trees that will have to go. If two houses are put at the higher portion of the 1ot, they will be-:closer to the road. She agreed that it is probably okay for the house to be demolished. There is more compromise than just marking some trees. She thQUght they r�eeded to go further than just 95% of these big old trees missing. Ms. Wick stated she has a petition signed by approximately 65 of the neighbors. She asked that this be presented to the City Council. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded to Ms. Modig, to accept the signed petition in#o the public record. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Larson stated he lives across the street from the property. He agrees that the house should be demolished. He has talked to the neighbors and all are opposed to three houses going in. All the lots around there are fairly decent size. All the properties have mature trees. If they start taking them down, they will not see mature trees. This is not an investment to him. He will not see anything in his pocket. This is all that the petitioner is looking at. He thinks there could be a compromise. He has a child who enjoys getting out and playing in the neighborhood. It would be sad for him to have three houses go in there. Besides the extra traffic, Gardena is a busy street as it is right now. With three houses, there will be � minimum of six cars. He just doesn't think this is right. � � Ms. Wilson lives directly across the street from the property. She concurs with everything that has been said so far. She had concerns about Lot #3 and asked for the dimensions of that lot. Mr. Bolin stated Lot #3 measures 90 feet x 134 feet. Ms. Wilson asked if staff had described the slope that is there from Lot 3 to Lot 1, and how a house could be built into that hill. 10 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 Mr. Bolin stated Lot 2 is fairly level. Most of the slope is on Lot 1. PAGE 11 Ms. Wilson stated she concurred that the house should be taken down. They had heard rumors of having 3 feet taken off that property. As a neighborhood, they have all mature trees, deep lots, park land behind them, lots of animals, and lots of rolling hills. She is very opposed to squishing three houses in there. If the developer had come to the neighborhood with a proposal for two houses, that might have been easier to swallow. Ms. Kuhlmeyer concurred with the comments. She lives across the street from the prope�ty. She is concerned about the tax ramifications and special assessments. Are . there any assessments or taxes they should be concerned about as property owners? . Mr. Hickok stated that as far as assessments, all of the costs of development are - borne by the developer. Neighbors and residents in the area should not expect any additional assessment because of this development. There is the added revenue of -- - having three homes where one had existed. Ms. Hatten stated she lives across from the 50-foot area and looks at it from her front window. They purchased their house in November. The front does not look very nice because they have a big tree so they don't get any sun and grass won't grow. They have erosion and they will have erosion down the street. They are debating about taking out a tree, and now this is talking about taking out 24 trees across the street. She has a huge problem with that. Her property at the street is where water drains out. This winter, there was a cycle of freeze, thaw, freeze, etc. That part of the street was all ice. There is a huge drainage problem there right now. They already have water that backs up into the driveway when it rains heavily. She would like the City to do something about that. A house on Lot 1 with the slope will have erosion. The drainage will go into the pond. She would like someone to look further into that. Ms. Hatten stated she is totally against three houses there. She does not want to look at that across the street. She did not think this is aesthetically pleasing. If they put in a huge house, it makes the rest of the houses built in the 1950's look like dumps. That does not help her as a property owner. She stated Mr. Varichak is a very nice guy; and, if he wants to make some money, that's fine, but can he reduce the size of the houses so they fit in with the other homes in the neighborhood? She would like that to be considered. Ms. Winiecki stated that a few years ago when the north property owners had some drainage problems, the City needed to come in and redo the driveway. In addition, some of the front yard had additional fill put in. This happened during the construction of the street on Benjamin. Mr. Bailey Tiller stated he has lived in the area for 60 years. Years ago, when they started the City, they were very fortunate to have a very good manager. The taxes were $88 per year. Now the taxes are $200 and they talk about development that is costly. It is costly because keeping everything in order costs a lot of money. They have enjoyed the block the way it is, and they want to keep it the way it is. The taxes cannot take care of all the extras. You cannot put this in to get more taxes. There is 11 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 12 nothing so nice as when you have nature. It would be nice to have it natural. If you drive off Gardena and Oakwood Manor to the west, years ago they were going to put houses in there. Now there is the most beautiful nature. They have to keep what they have as good gifts and so he wants to keep this now as a gift. Mr. Jerome Tiller stated he has lived here for 50 years and is a long time resident of the neighborhood. The Commission is faced with a terrible dilemma. Here is a gentleman who has lived three or four blocks from the neighborhood for 15 years who � purchased this property on speculation. The Commission's decision is eitherto prQtect the speculator's investment or to somehow reach some sort of compromise and protect the neighborhood's investment in this beautiful lot. -Some of th� memb�rs have been there. This is a special lot. He always thought they woulci have rich-neighbor.s; . someday because he never thought anyone would take that lot and split it up. There is � also a steep slope on that hill. He does not know how they intend_.to: acrange that land and put a house on that site. It will be costly in the long run because of the potential drainage problems. Mr. Jerome Tiller asked the Commission to take a hard look at the situation before making a decision. He though the neighborhood was willing to compromise. He would prefer to see one lot, but they are probably realistically thinking two lots, but he°did not think anyone in the neighborhood would live very well with three lots. It would destroy the present unique situation. Fridley has a few nice garden spots. Gardena is a very old neighborhood. It has a nice mix of old and new; it is a beautiful area. You need to preserve it the best way you can. Ms. Friedmann stated she has some concerns with this proposal. The first is squishing three newly constructed homes and making them consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. She has lived in the area for about 10 years, and they liked the charm and the large trees. The glarng inconsistency of the three new homes would not be very pleasant. Her second concern is the soil composition and the potential for erosion. She has spent many years as an environmental engineer and understands this. Along with the erosion and increased drainage (which will by nature want to go north and further erode rather than going up hill onto Benjamin), erosion will be a considerable factor as well as the integrity of the structure on that soil. Her third concern is the precedent that this sets. She lives across from another elderly lady who has a beautiful lot with large old oak trees that is oversized and square footage-wise could very conceivably be split into three lots. It is a beautiful site. You could conceivably put two houses on this site. It is so inconsistent with the rest of the hous�s in the area and the scenery. Both of these areas are in her neighborhood. When she is out walking her dog, she enjoys the shade and the scenery and would like that to remain. Mr. Jerome Tiller stated he thought the trees are more like 300 years old. When he was little, those trees were as big as they are now. Ms. Savage asked the petitioner his reaction to a double lot split. Mr. Varichak asked if the City would consider purchasing the lot. 12 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 13 Ms. Modig asked the petitioner if they had soil testing done on the property. Sometimes after a soil test is done, you may find that it is not buildable. Mr. Varichak stated the site is buildable. Mr. Sielaff asked how staff determined the measurement of 50 feet. Mr. Bolin stated staff sat down with the engineering department and figured out how far up the hill they would need to go to preserve that area. Mr. Sielaff stated he is concerned that Lot 1 is buildable. He is not sure if there were - any restrictions in the code that constitutes a buildable lot and what doesn't. Mr. Hickok stated the zoning code sets standards for setbacks, landscape, etc., but it; does not talk about soil conditions. The building code addresses that. There is a requirement that the foundation be adequate to support the home, to prove that the footings need to be based on soil compaction tests, etc. As they build homes, they need to verify that the soil conditions are such that it will support the home proposed for the site. The questions about soil conditions are valid. The builder would find out at the time of the soil tests. Oftentimes it is not the soil but the design of the footing that needs to match that soil. Those are building issues that need to be taken to the building department. The grading requirement is specific in the building code. If the land steps down, that needs to be considered in the design of the home. On Lot 1, the builder will need to determine the contour that will be needed and the placement of the home in order to make this work properly. Mr. Sielaff stated there is no specific requirement on the degree of slope or no restrictions on degree of slope. Mr. Hickok stated there is none on a lot like this. Along the river, there is a bluff requirement. Ms. Hatten asked if the City has considered the flow of drainage to the street and how that collects in the sewer and goes back down into the pond. Has the City considered the extra impact in the area of the additional water in that area? Will that end up having standing water? Mr. Hickok stated City staff met with a development review committee consisting of staff from engineering, fire, police, assessor, and building departments to analyze the questions that the neighbors are asking. It is important to know that the planning staff is presenting information received from a number of different sources. A determination was made that three lots and three homes can work. Mr. Saba asked what level of rainfall these calculations are based upon. Mr. Hickok stated that in commercial and industrial development, they base the calculations on 10 year, 15 year, and 100 year storm events. In residential areas, it is done in very much the same fashion. They look at the density of the development, the roofs and driveways, and the kind of runoff they will get as a result of that 13 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAG E 14 development. They look at the hard surFace area and the areas to handle that capacity. In this case, the answer has been yes. Mr. Saba asked what criteria is used to save trees. Mr. Hickok stated they were obligated under stipulation as part of the subdivision to protect the trees in the Royal Oaks Development south of Totino-Grace. This stipulation was in place as well. Staff did go down and mark the trees. He thinks that was a good end product. There are a good number of mature trees that were left as� a result of marking the trees and then protecting those that are left during construction. Mr. Saba asked if there is an estimate of the number of trees that could be saved. Mr. Hickok stated that would depend upon the placement of the-homes. Staff have talked to the developer about this. Trees are valuable to a lot. The more trees you can preserve, the more value you have in a lot. To design � home for_a wooded lo#, ._ the footprint looks at the lay of the lar�d to minimize the impact. The more trees that are pre�erved, the better off they are. Ms. Hatten askeci if the engineers are saying that the drainage system that they fiave now is adequate. She did not think the current system in adequate because the water is backing up their driveway when it rains. Mr. Hickok stated there is no plan at this time to upgrade the storm sewer on Benjamin. Ms. Wick stated there are some tough questions that need to be answered. She felt like the neighbors are fighting the City. She wondered what the motivation was to try to convince the Commission that three lots is a good idea. Mr. Hickok stated the code sets a minimum standard through the zoning and subdivision ordinance on what is in the City of Fridley. By doing that, there is a standard that is essentially an invitation to developers. As you look at property, you would look at the subdivision ordinance and the zoning ordinance to see if your proposed development for that lot meets the City's requirements. Through the State statutes, the City has the ability to subdivide the land within the City the way it sees fit. The City considers requests based on the standards. Has the developer met the minimum standards of the subdivision ordinance? Yes. Has the developer met the minimum standards of the zoning code? Yes. If these are met, staff cannot recommend denial. Mr. Jerome Tiller asked if staff is predisposed to protect the investment of developers regardless of the impact it might have on aesthetics. Ms. Savage stated staff must follow the law. She did not think it had anything to do with favoring development. There may be other considerations beyond the fact the property meets the standards. There are other considerations, and that is why there is this meeting. 14 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 15 Mr. Jerome Tiller asked what would be some of the other considerations. Ms. Savage stated one would be neighborhood reaction. She stated this is very difficult, as they all understand how the neighbors feel. Every Commission member would like to have property or property close to them that is beautiful with trees and wildlife. But, at the same time, they are bound by laws, statutes, and regulations. Mr. Jerome Tiller stated they are bound by laws, statutes and regulations that determine what a minimum code;would be. Are they obligated to protect the investment of a land speculator? What value do you place on aesthetics and neighborhood aesthetics? Values are subjective. Does a code invite developers to develop? He is having trouble with that. Mr. Sielaff stat�d the CommiSSion also has to consider land ownership. Whaf can you do with land that you own? Ms: Kuhlmeyer asked what the timeline was for the completion of this project. Mr. Varichak stated that if everything goes according to schedule through the City, County, etc., this process will probably be completed at the end of September. Ms. Modig asked the petitioner if he is going to develop the property himself or if he is planning to sell the parcels to individual parties. Mr. Varichak stated that it is possible he wi(I sell to individual parties. It depends on who purchases the property. He will not be the builder. Mr. Bailey Tiller stated he has lived in the neighborhood for 60 years. He hoped that the Commission would listen to the people that live there. Ms. Savage stated that regardless of the recommendation made by the Planning Commission, the final decision will be made by the City Council. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:25 P.M. Ms. Modig stated she lives in the neighborhood, and she has been on the property. The City is bound by the statutes and the laws of what they can or cannot do. As long as the property owner meets the criteria, they can divide the property. The City cannot say no. Her feeling is that she would really like to table the request and let the property owner meet with the neighbors to determine if it was possible to do a two-way split. She felt there would be some value to do that, but she thought this was not going to happen. She would vote against the request because there are too many variables regarding drainage, grading, the trees, ponding, etc. The City has been assured by the engineers that there is not a wetland there. They keep hearing from the neighbors about a pond that forms after it rains, so perhaps they need to look at the drainage in the area. There are too many ifs for her. She would vote against the request. 15 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 16 Mr. Kondrick stated he would vote in favor of the request because of the criteria they have to follow. He is basing his decision upon the fact that the engineers know what � they are doing. It is his understanding that, if three houses are built, there cannot be - any more water than what is there now. He does not see how they can deny the owner from putting three pretty homes in the area if it can be done. The lots are over sized. They are doing what they can to put the third house back 50 feet. There are some._ tough stipulations. He walked the property and is aware of what the neighbors are talking about. Lot 1 will be a challenge for anyone that decides to: auild there. That is the way things happen sometimes. He will trust that the Planning staff and Engineering staff know what they are doing. If the stipulations are adhered to, t�e would vote to -. approve. Ms. Modig stated she did not mean to infer staff did not know what.they are doing. She just feels that there is so much neighborhood animosity towards the request, and she f�els that three lots are just too many. __ Mr. Sielaff stated he is empathetic to the residents. In his job, he has to deal with minimum standards. The minimum can become how far you can go down. On the flip side, minimum standards will improve the quality throughout the City. He recogn'rzes this, and it is frustrating that they cannot do much about it. The City has a code with certain standards. Any person can purchase land and design down to those standards. The petitioner is the landowner and meets the minimum standards. He would vote in favor of the request. Mr. Sab� stated that if he was to vote his personal feelings, he would vote against the request. He loves trees and wetland areas. It appears to be a very nice property; however, three legal lots are proposed. The City engineers have looked at the drainage and agree that it is workable. That puts some responsibility back on the City. The Planning Commission's recommendation will go on to City Council for a final decision, and everything the neighbors have said will go to the City Council. It is certainly a tough decision. The lots are legal size with sufficient room for three legal homes. He is very concerned about Lot 1 and where the house is placed. There are market forces that would have to determine the placement of the house and the trees to be saved. He would vote in favor of the request. Ms. Savage stated that if it were her neighborhood, she would be out in the audience. This is an extremely difficult decision. She is very concerned about the reaction of the �eighborhood and very concerned about taking down mature trees. On the other side, she is a lawyer, and she cannot see any way to deny a request that meets the standards of the code. She would have to agree with the majority and vote in favor of the request. Ms. Modig asked if it would be possible to add another stipulation regarding the testing of the soil and that this be done before the replat is done. Mr. Hickok stated this can be done. If the Commission makes the motion with the stipulations, staff will make sure that this happens. �. PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 17 Ms. Modig stated that if the soil tests show that there are a lot of problems, the petitioner may decide not to do the project. Mr. Kondrick suggested the wording for tMe stipulation: "Appropriate soil testing shall be done to assure a buildable home sites." Mr. Hickok asked what the timing expectaiion is on the added stipulation. Ms. Savage stated it would be helpful to have this done before the City Council meeting. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded try Mr. Sielaff, to recommend approval of Replat Request, P:S. #99-03, by Stephen Varichak and James Surdyk, to create three separate lots from Lot 22, Auditor's Subdivision #92, generally located at 1583 Gardena Avenue, with the following stipulations: 1. Grading and drainage plan shall-be approved by City's engineering staff prior #o the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impact to the low area located along the Northern most edge of property. 2. Petitioner shall provide a 20-foot drainage and utility easement along North property line of proposed Lot 1. 3. No grading or land alterations shall be permitted within 50 feet of the North property line of proposed Lot 1. 4. Petitioner shall provide proof that old well located on the site is properly capped or removed. 5. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 6. Petitioner shall pay $750 per lot park fees prior to issuance of building permits. 7. Petitioner shall grant code required 12-foot utility and drainage easement along western boundary of property. 8. Petitioner shafl pay all water and sewer connection fees. 9. Petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 10. Appropriate soil testing shall be done to assure buildable home sites on Lots 1, 2, and 3, and to have that information available by the next City Council meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, SAVAGE, KONDRICK, SABA, AND SIELAFF VOTING AYE, MODIG VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. Mr. Bolin stated this item would be considered by the City Council on July 26. 3. PUBLIC HEARING• CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP #99-04, BY JEFFREY VOGEL GRACE EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH: To expand the educational, administrative, and gymnasium space of the church located at Parcel 300, North '/2 of Section 11, generally located at 755 73'� Avenue. � MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba to open the public hearing. 17 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 18 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 9:40 P.M. Mr. Bolin stated Grace Evangelical Free Church is requesting a special use permit to allow the expansion of the educational, administration, and gymnasium space of the existing church located at 755 73`d Avenue. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family, as are the neighboring properties to the north and east. To the west of the church property is Madsen Park. To the south across 73�d is a warehouse zoned M-2. . Mr. Bolin stated a portion of the existing church would be removed and a new administration/educational building will be constructed in its place. There are single family homes along the eastern boundary. There is approximately 58 feet from the . proposed buildings to the eastern property line. The lot is relatively flat with landscaping, parking lots, and the existing church buildings. Mr. Bolin stated the first building pe�mit for this property was issued in 1964. In 4983, - --.-- - Special Use Permit, SP #83-13, was granted for an addition to the existing church structu�e and was the first special use permit granted for this property. As part of this process, if the proposed special use permit is granted, staff would ask that this replace SP #83-13. In 1990, Special Use Permit SP #90-02, was granted for the church to have a day care facility. This never happened, and the special use permit expired after one year. Mr. �olin stated the code allows churches as a special use in an R-1 zoning district. The proposed expansion complies with the code requirements. Based on that, staff recommends approval of the special use permit with the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall place an adequate number of spruce trees along the portion of the eastern property line, where only bushes currently exist, to provide proper screening for neighboring property. A landscape plan shall be submitted and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Newly created parking areas shall be lined with a concrete curb and shall be properly striped to accommodate the required number of parking stalls. 3. The drive on east side of Church shall remain a one-way drive with angle parking. 4. Special Use Permit, SP #83-13, shall be replaced by Special Use Permit, SP #99-04. 5. The pe#itioner shall construct the gymnasium out of the same exterior materials as those used on the proposed administration/education building. The exterior elevation plans for the gymnasium shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. The petitioner shall step the east wall of the administration/education building to create a scale more compatible with the residential prope�ties east of the church site. The "stepped" building plan shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit. Mr. Bolin stated that on the site plan, the administration/education building located in the southeast corner is proposed to be 39 feet in height. The gymnasium is proposed to be 25 feet in height. Code allows a height of 45 feet. Churches in the R-1 district actually : PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 19 have the CR-1 zoning standards applied to them. Staff has received four letters regarding this request. He has received six or seven phone calls, and Mr. Hickok has received four calls. The concerns have been with the height of the buildings and also with the elevations of the proposed building as sent to the neighbors. Those elevations show the gymnasium as a tip-up panel building with a lighter color than the existing building. The administration/education addition is shown as a brick building with a cedar shake mansard around the top. The gym clashed-with the existing architecture. That is the reason for the last finro stipulations. Staff:would like to see the gymnasium tied into the rest ofthe property, and the administration/education building to have a stepped-back roof in order to make it more compatible with the church and the residential area. Mr. Bolin stated the code requires 150 parking stalls. With the proposed expansion and the added stalls, they will be over the required number of parking stalfs at 183. Mr. Bolin stated that as part of this expans;on, a letter included in the agenda packet states that the church will stagger their church services and Sunday school services so there is not so much overlap and will free up more of their parking. Ms. Modig asked staff to explain what they mean by a step-down roof. Mr. Bolin stated this is a type of roof design that staggers the height of the roof in such a way that it resembles a step. Mr. Sielaff asked if that will take care of the space needs. Mr. Bolin stated he did not know. Ms. Modig asked if this addresses the issue that was addressed in the letter received from Roger and Gwen Nawrocki dated July 2, 1999. Mr. Bolin stated it is a combination of neighbor concems and staff concerns as they saw some of the other elevations. If something is allowed as a special use permit, it is staff's job to make sure that it is as compatible as possible with the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Sielaff asked if the building would be three stories. Mr. Bolin stated the administration/education building would be three stories. The comments received were on the height of the adr�ninistration/education building and the lack of character on the gymnasium building. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to receive into the public record the letter from Roger and Gwen Nawrocki dated July 2, 1999. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Peterson stated he is the Chaof the chu ch for 27eyears'V Grace Evangelical F ees 6 m o n t h s a n d h a s b e e n a m e m b e r 1� PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 20 Church has been a part of the City for 35 years. The first building was constructed in 1964. They have tried to serve the Lord over the past 35 years, hopefully in a favorable and responsible way. Theyhave tried to cooperate with the neighbors and the City, and they had hoped it was a good relationship. The reason they are seeking this special use permit it to finish the current facility. They have an enormous need for educational space and fellowship space. They are now using hallways, and are not doing a good job in terms of education. They want the facility to blend in with the community and the environment. It is not their intention to be disruptive. They want to be an asset to the community. They want to be good ne.igh:bors. Jhey have an architect and building committee that have worked long and hard to try to fit their needs and to blend in. The architect is present at the meeting: Mr. Peterson stated they want to be good neighbors. They hope they are currently serving the community and praviding act�vities for kids and youth and want to be a positive influence in this neighborhood. They would appreciate the support of the Plan�ing staff and apprecoate the opportunity to share their plans. He recently hea�d of a Gallop poll that asked across the United Stated the question, "Do you have any religiaus training in your background?" In 1952, 6% answered, no; in 1981, 21% said, no; in 1993, 35% said, no. He is using that as an illustration. He would like to hope that they as a church are making an influence and are being an influence for the Lord in the community. Mr. Roberts stated he is with Genesis Architecture and is working with Welsh Companies to facilitate this special use permit for the Grace Evangelical Free Church. Mr. Roberts reviewed the site plan identifying the proposed administration/education building and the proposed gymnasium. They are proposing less than 3,000 square feet that include the gym and the administration/education building. They have some room to maneuver to reduce that third level. They could lose about 1/3 to'/z. This is now in the master planning process. Some of the comments heard to date are a bit premature in the sense that what has been put out publicly is based on a master plan. It is purely subjective at this point. Mr. Roberts stated they chose these areas after looking at a number of alternatives. There is some additional space to the north. They tried to maintain the outer property in terms of screening and setbacks because of some of the previous issues that had been discussed in terms of the sanctuary to be sure there is a buffer. They looked at putting the addition to the west. It is fairly narrow to the east and west sides. They need to maintain that space from a vehicle flow standpoint. That was the general thinking in terms of locating these buildings. Mr. Roberts reviewed the elevations of the administration/education building and the gymnasium. In previous conversations, they had talked about precast panels for the gymnasium. They have done them on a number of gymnasiums for churches in other cities. Given the timeline and process, it looks Iike a basic industrial building. Ultimately, there woufd be some type of mix, whether it is the inclusion of brick or stucco or other treatment. They would like to work with staff in terms of developing these pieces without precluding the use of materials. He believed they could come up with something that is in tune with the rest of the building and serve the general purpose. They can use the step back design for the administration/education building without a 2� PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 21 problem. The elevation as shown is not the final product. As they start to lay out the spaces and make it function property, the plans wilf change as it is finalized and as they map out the spaces. Ms. Savage asked if they had any problems with the stipulations. Mr. Roberts stated they have no problems as long as it does not preclude the use of any specific materials in terms of the matching and making sure it is consistent witF� � what is existing. Mr. Kondrick asked the petitioner if it would be a problem to make the gym look like everything else. Mr. Roberts stated that is subjective. In the past, using similar materials, precast concrete brings a lot of baggage with it in terms of what you see. It does not have to be that way. There are options. You can mix the brick_as a part of the materials with perhaps a brick wainscoat, you can stamp the precast so it has a brick texture, you can have an aggregate, you can have more horizontal lines. He thought there were some avenues they could utilize. The worst case scenario is they could use a brick veneer and stucco. He thought they could come up with something and can work with staff to do that. Mr. Revering stated he sat through the last public hearing and he sees some similarities although this is somewhat different. What additional leverage or control does the City have because of that? Mr. Hickok stated the added leverage really relates to compatibility. The City does not have enormous discretion in putting things on that don't have a rational nexus to compatibility. Being designated as a special use in a district recognizes that the use itself can be okay in the district, hed oaosa� st ff can�ecomtmend sof ineemodificat ons about some of the elements of t p p through the stipulations. Mr. Revering stated he was opposed to the request but is less opposed now after hearing the additional stipulations. He has several concems. The first is the site lines. He showed a picture from his deck facing the door of the existing administration/ education building. The proposal as it was first presented to him would seriously impact the open feeling in his back yard. He knows that site lines are a concern of the neighbors. It sounds like the step back design would help. He would like to see a drawing that is relevant. The current drawing seems quite drastic. What they come up with as they go through more design development may be more acceptable. Mr. Sielaff asked if the stepped-back part would be away from Mr. Revering's property. Mr. Bolin stated the stepped back part would be going away from Mr. Revering's property. Mr. Revering stated that as far as site lines, he is not saying they should preserve that area in its natural state but he did think it is reasonable to expect that the long 21 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 22 established views that are similar to other residential views in the neighborhood would be reasonable. He is looking for something that seems reasonable that is not treating his property differently from other residen#s in the City. Mr. Revering stated his second concern is the building appearance. The architect did discuss this. To him, the phone mansard roof line looked gaudy and like an apartment building. He would like to see some additional lines. He thought the stepping would break it up. Some additional design treatments could rnake it fit in with the neighborhood better or:make it look more like a church-related building rather than an apartment building. As far as the building at this time, he is in a wait-and-see mode and would like to see the designs when they are further along. Mr. Revering stated another concern is the internally lit sign that the church put up abo�t a year ago. It is very bright and lights �p the be�rooms in the second story of his house. He did not think the sign needed to be that bright. He would like to have them show_the residents-eu±side of the official process �rhat their plans are as they develop. Mr. Savage asked Mr. Robertc to respond to the request to show the neighborhood the plans. Mr. Roberts stated he did not think that was a problem. They had talked about inviting the neighborhood to be a part of the process. In the original process, they had talked about the appropriate time. They will invite them to look at the plans and talk about the different issues. A resident at 7350 Jackson Street stated that she was thankful when she built 28 years ago to have that church in her back yard. She is not too happy about this building, but feels better after seeing the information presented. She thanked the City for sending the letter; otherwise, she did not think she would have been informed. She felt bad that the church did not come to its neighbors. They had no indication this was going to happen. The church now has its fourth pastor. Each pastor has had a change. The first pastor was very sweet. She and the second and third pastor had issues about the property. They did ask what she would like in the back — a fence or spruces and bushes. They chose the trees that she took care of and watered. There are spruces there and she does not know why they are saying they need more spruces or more landscaping along the east driveway. They maintain a small area by mowing it for the church. Will they cut into all the spruces that are along that area by the east driveway? Do they plan to put in new trees? How close will they be to her property line? Mr. Roberts stated the perimeter will stay the same as it has been. There will be some additional spruces where there is that one gap which is pretty well filled in. The only new construction with regard to the site is the front where there is a drop-off and entry in the front. They will be cutting into the front part but they are staying within the setback lines. The existing trees will remain. Two existing trees will have to be removed for the gymnasium; otherwise, the rest will remain. Mr. Sweeney stated he was there to also speak for Gwen and Roger Nawrocki. He lives to the east of the church as do the Nawrockis. He will look at the gymnasium rather than the sanctuary. He presented a drawing of site lines showing 93 feet from 22 PLANNING CO MMISSiON MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 23 the proposed building and 176 feet from the existing sanctuary. The angle from where he sees it now to the eave of the church is presently 3.5 degrees and 7.2 degrees. The site line for the proposed gymnasium would be 14.75 degrees. That is taking a iot of skyline away and moving it closer to the house. Before the stepping was propQSed, the angle was 21 degrees. Mr. Sielaff asked if the trees are screening that. Mr. Sweeney stated he is at the property with the low bushes. The trees will have tobe � 20-feet tall in order to screen the building from his house. The Nawrockis are concerned about the site lines to the education building from their deck. Their site line ° will change from 8.75 degrees to approximately 22 degrees. The gym building i� his primary problem. There are two ways to build a building--from the ground and go up or from the ground and go down below grade. Mr. Sweeney stated one of the things they are talking about hece_is property value. He. sees a rather drastic reduction in property values. Would it be possible for a neutral party to give an evaluation of property value before and after, and have the church pay for all three properties? Mr. Revering stated it keeps coming up that the trees will screen this change in site lines. The screening is to mitigate the view of something ugly. In a case like this where you have a big building, the trees are going to enhance the appearance but they do not screen it. He would appreciate it if they would be careful about the use of the word `screening' in a case like this. A wall of trees does not help when you have a wall of brick right behind it as far as having light in the evening and being in the backyard. Closing it in with trees or brick does not matter. Ms. Sweening stated the east driveway is right behind their house. They have a problem with that driveway. When it was put in, they said it would be one way. It is not one way. Perhaps when they come to church it is one way, but it is a speedway. Originally, Madsen Park was clos�d off by a fence. Others partied there and played ball behind the fence. Then an opening was put in. She has nothing against using ihe parking lot to use the ball diamond, but they speed by, screeching tires, etc. That driveway is not a one-way driveway. Mr. Sweeney stated it appears that the door to the gym on the east side means a lot of traffic. Is it possible to move that door to the rear to enter? Mr. Roberts stated there is currently a door in that location. They must have exits from an emergency standpoint. That door is more to get out rather than to get in. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 10:32 P.M. Ms. Modig stated she can understand the concem about the height but she thought they were going to address that issue. 23 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 24 Mr. Saba stated he hoped it would be addressed between the church and the neighbors before going to the City Council. MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend approval of a Special Use Permit, SP #99-04, by Jeffrey Vogel, Grace Evangelical Free Church, to expand the educational, administrative, and gymnasium space of the church located at Parcel 300, North'/2 of Section 11, generally located at 755 73�d Avenue, wiih the following stipulations 1. Petitioner shall place an adequate number of spruce trees along #he portion of the eastern property line, where only bushes currently exist, to provide proper screening for neighboring property. A landscape plan shall be submitted and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Newly created parking areas shall be lined with a concrete curb and shall be properly striped to accommoda#e �he required nurrt5er of-p�rking stalls. _ 3. The drive on the east side of Church shall remain a one-way drive with angle parking. 4. Special Use Permit, SP #83-03, shall be replaced by Special Use Permit, SP #99-04. 5. The petitioner shall construct the gymnasium out of the same exterior materials as those used on the proposed administration/education building. The exterior elevation plans for the gymnasium shall be reviewed and approved by City staff �rior to issuance of a building permit. 6. The petitioner shall step the east wall of the administration/education building to create a scale more compatible with the residential properties east of the cMurch site. The "stepped" building plan shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Bolin stated this item would be considered by the City Council on July 26. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST. #99-01. BY THE CITY OF FRIDLEY: To amend the Transportation Chapter in the Comprehensive Plan to include the TH 65 Improvement Project. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Sielaff to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 10:34 P.M. Mr. Hickok stated staff is requesting an amendment to the transportation chapter of the comprehensive plan. Staff is seeking approval to prepare an application for funding and to prepare the appropriate text amendment for the City Council and Metropolitan Council to review. Staff has initiated this amendment as part of the Highway 65 improvement project. This project was identified as a long-term improvement to the 24 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 25 function of Highway 65. The purpose of going through this process now is because staff is making application for Federal funds to complete further work on Highway 65. Those funds are part of the new ISTEA program for Federal funding. It is necessary to prepare an application and submit it before the end of August. In order to meet this deadline, staff is taking out the transportation portion of the comprehensive plan and making sure it is consistent not only on Highway 65 but other areas and make certain that the application coincides with where they are going as a City. Mr. Hickok stated that in 1998, SRF Consulting Group took a look at the Medtronic project, Highway 65, traffic counts and activity in the area, and performance projections for the area. In the year 2010 with no improvements, they would be at secvice level E with level A being the best. By 2020, the service level would be F,-tMe worst tevel,.at these intersections. That is considering the current improvements. With additional improvements that can be made with the help of Federal funding, staff feels that a performance level C could be attained. The proposed Iane project would provide an additionai lane to the north and to the south in the causeway area befinreen the two portions of Moore Lake. The improvements would go from the existing Lake Pointe Drive to 100 feet past the intersection at Moore Lake Drive. Mr. Kondrick asked why they are not planning to extend this to Mississippi Street. - Mr. Hickok stated it is important to get through that intersection at Moore Lake Drive. Tra�c counts show a need for improvement to that intersection. They did consider extending this to Mississippi Street but felt the additional cost could kill the project. The area where it is needed and where the numbers show the performance is poor is in the proposed area. If deemed necessary in the future, they would take it to that point. There is an enormous amount of activity that happens befinreen those intersections. The activity drops so the performance is not as bad at Mississippi as it is to the south. Mr. Hickok stated the comprehensive plan amendment matches the request. Federal funding is scored on whether or not the proposal matches the comprehensive plan and whether or not it helps solve a problem identified in the comprehensive plan. They have talked with the Metropolitan Council and obtained the application from the Federal government. Staff would like to have the endorsement of the Planning Commission to go ahead and prepare the language. This hearing is to take comments. If the Planning Commission is comfortable with staff creating the language, making the application, and then coming back with the actual language, that will keep staff on the necessary timeline. Mr. Saba stated that when going south, the metered lights on I-694 creates traffic back- ups. He has seen cars backed up to 61 S�. He felt they would have better traffic flow without those meters. He thought turning off the lights would do more than adding another lane. He is not opposed to adding another lane either. Ms. Savage asked if there would be lights on the causeway. Mr. Hickok stated this has not yet been determined but the accoutrements will be in place so that lights can be installed if the decision is made to do so. 25 PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 26 Mr. Kondrick asked what the costs of these improvements is expected to be. Mr. Hickok stated the City's share would be a 20% match or $2.9 million:- Total project costs are estimated to be $7.5 million. One of the concerns is the condition of the median. The good news is that type of inedian would be replaced with a more modern design that should give a better appearance when traveling through the causeway area. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Ms. Modig, to close the public hearing. - UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED °' THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED'AT 10:40 P.M. MOTION by Ms. Savage, seconded by Ms. Modig;'to authorize staff to prepare the appropriate language for the text amendrnent to amend the Transportation . Chapter in the Comprehensive Plan. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE. 5. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 3 1999 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to receive the minutes of the May 3, 1999, Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 6. 1999. HUMAN RESOURCE COMMISSION MEETING: MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to receive the minutes of the May 6, 1999, Human Resource Commission meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 20. 1999. HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING: MOTION by Mr. Sielaff, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to receive the minutes of the May 20, 1999, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 3 1999 HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING: � PLANNING CO MMISSION MEETING, JULY 7, 1999 PAGE 27 MOTION by Ms. Modig, seconded by Mr. Sielaff, to receive the minutes of the June 3, 1999, Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to adjourn the meeting. �� UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARE(3f �.:. :- ' THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE JULY 7, 1999, PLANNING COMMISSION � MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:45 P.M. F�s ectfully sub itted, Lavonn Cooper �� Recording Secretary 27 MEMORANDUM PLAl��NING DIVISION Date: 7/15/99 n / , To: William Bums, City Manage�� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinaior Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Planning Commission action on LS #99-01 M-99-168 INTRODUCTION The City of Fridley has been asked by Monica Lane to grant a lot split of her fathers property at 1132 Mississippi St, allowing her to construct a single family home on the newly created lot. Both lots, if the split is granted, would meet all zoning code requirements for lot size and setbacks. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION At the July 7, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for LS #99-01. A motion was made to approve Lot Split, LS #99-01, tn allow the property located at 1132 Mississippi Street to be split into two lots. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the planning commission and grant the proposed Lot Split, LS #99-01, with stipulations as presented. : City of Fridley Land Use Application �5-99-01 July 7, 1999 [�F.NERAL INFORMATION Applicant: Monica Lane 3451 1215` Ave. Coon Rapids, MN 55433 Requested Action: Lot Split Purpose: To create an additional single family lot Fxisting Zomng. R-1 (Single Family Residential) Location: 1132 Mississippi Street NE Size: 45,200 square feet 1.04 acres Existing Land Use: Single family home. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family & R-1 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Proposed Chir. Clinic & R-3 W: HWY 65 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Proposed lot sizes exceed City Code requirements. Zoning History: . Home built prior to 1949 1949 - Garage built 1952 - Home addition . 1962 - Home addition Legal Description of Properly: North 1/2 of Lot 9, Auditors Subdivision Number 88. Public Utilities: Water and sewer are available at the site. SPECIAL INFORMATION Transportation: Mississippi Street provides access to the site. Physical Characteristics: Level, well kept yard with large trees. SUNIlVIARY OF PROJECT Monica Lane, petitioner, is seeking to split the North'/z of Lot 9, Auditors Subdivision 88 in order to construct an additional single family home. SUNIMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this lot split request. Proposed lots exceed the size standards required by the City of Fridley Zoning Code. Fridley requires thatlots in an R-1 district be a minunum of 75' in width with a minimum total lot area of 9,000 square feet. The proposed lots would be 85' X 239.23' and 75' X 239.23' in size. CITY COUNCII. ACTION 29 �x�stmg nome Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin LS 99-01 ANALYSIS -- Monica Lane, petitioner, is seeking to spiit the North'/2 of Lot 9, Auditors Subdivision 88 in order to construct an additional single family home. The entire property is relatively flat, covered by large trees, and extends back from Mississippi Street 239'. The newly created Parcel B would measure �5' X 239.23' or 17, 942 square feet. Currently there is an older home, built prior to 1949, and a garage bca#ednn the Western portion of the lot. This home will remain in place, on proposed Parcel A, as it does meet all required setbacks. Due to the properties location, near HWY 65, staff has suggested the petitioners share driveway access from Mississippi Street and record 12 foot driveway easements along the common boundary between the two properties. In the event that the finro properties are ever owned by persons not related, access will still be available to both properties. RECOMMENDATIONS City Staff recommends approval of this lot split request, with stipu/ations. Proposed lots exceed the size standards required by the City of Fridley Zoning Code. Fridley requires that lots in an R-1 district be a minimum of 75' in width with a minimum total lot area of 9,000 square feet. The proposed lots would be 85' and 75' in width and from 17,942.25 square feet to 20,334 square feet in total size. North edge of property. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends that the following stipulations be attached to the lot split. 1. Petitiorrer to extend current 10' easement along the entire Western boundary. 2. Petitioner to pay $750 park dedication fee for new lot prior to issuance of building permit. 3. Petitioner to grant code required 12' utility and drainage easement along Southem boundary of property. 4. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 5. Petitioner shall record a 12' driveway easement along both sides of common boundary. 30 6. The current 15' private easement along Eastem boundary of property to be vacated, or new home and accessory buildings to be setback 15' from the Eastem boundary so as to not encroach into the easement. 7. Petitioner shall meet all right-of-way dedication requirements of Anoka County for that portion of each lot that abuts Mississippi Street. 8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extentpossibte: All trees required to be removed forthe new house shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of the building permit. 31 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLIITION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION, LOT SPLIT, LS #99-01, TO CRF3AT8 TWO RBSIDENTIAL LOTS, ON THB NORTH % OF LOT 9, AIIDITOR'S SIIBDIVISION, BROORVILW SECOND, GENERALLY LOCAT}3D AT 1132 MISSISSIPPI STREST N.L. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Lot Split, LS #99-01, on July 7, 1999 and recommended approval,;. with. stipulations; and WHEREAS, the City Council at their July 26, 1999 meeting approved the Lot Split request, with stipulations attached as Exhibit A.; and WHEREAS, such appro.val was to create two residential lots, based on new legal description which read as follows: � Proposed New Parcel A: The West 85.0 feet, of the North one- half (N 1/2) of Lot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 88 according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the Registrar of Deeds in and for Anoka County, Minnesota. Proposed New Parcel B: That part of the North ;� of LOT 9, Auditor's Subdivision NO. 88 lying East of the West 85.00 feet of said Lot 9, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the registrar of deeds in and for Anoka County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the City has received the required Certificate of Survey from the owners; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley directs the petitioner to record this Lot Split at Anoka County within six (6) months or said approval shall become null and void. PASSF3D AND ADOPTED BY T8E CITY COIINCIL OF THS CITY OF FRIDLSY THIS 9th DAY OF JIILY, 1999. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK 32 NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR Resolution No. - Page 2 Exhibit A 1. Petitioner to extend current 10' easement along the entire Westem boundary. 2. Petitioner to pay $750 park dedication fee for new lot prior to issuance of building permit. 3. Petitionerto grant code required 1�' utility and drainage easement along Southern boundary of property. 4. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 5. Petitioner shall record a 12' driveway easement along both sicles of common boundary. 6. The current 15' private easement along Eastem boundary of property to be vacated, or new home and accessory buildings to be setback 15' from the Eastem boundary so as to not encroach into the easement. 7. Petitioner shall meet all right-of-way dedication requirements of Anoka County for that portion of each lot that abuts Mississippi Street. 8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new house shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to issuance of the building permit. 33 �� Certificate W � b e w� 3� ;� � �ss�ssi O aF M � S88'47'1; � � Sidewatk cu of Su rvey for M on ic eet 60.00' �M � W 1O � 85.00 �IZ II2 75.00 PP �� n I � � CRa�rE i ' Q ivEw�Y, _ 3 � ( EASE/hEN R c�ry N ( I � REOwiREM Ni� .: PP � i�21�q9 PP a Lane :'' � Scal e: 1 "= 50' I > �n Z � o l � �( � � I >, v L °�o �O 2 •`��o i �� I � 0 o „ O V �p C � � � Y 3 � i J ^ c N O M t O V O Z / 3 I 0 I L � � � co � 0 3 t rn _ I �IN Parcel A � Y °� � Zs.o�z sF -�� Parcei B� J� N ( I 20,334 SF ` � � I o I� N � i ;� House � � I I o I � I � I N I �, PP I_ I},�I E I J/ � h o I W I ( T � O V I ; C I� j � � � I� � Gara�e (� r I 3 I._ I —I �2 12I N 75.00 --- 7 Od N � " N88'47'15"W 150.00' ,_.,._ Basis of Bearings is assumed. � a110�q �fOf1 MOf1YRl�flt $�:. EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION North ono-half(N1/2) ofL.ot 9, Auditors Subdivision No. 88 ac�din8 W the plat t�'eof on file and of record ia the Office of the Registrar of Deed4 in and for Anoka Cowuy, Minnesota. Subjecl W a road right of way nuu�ing across the NoAh licx of UK land herein describod. Subjed to an easemeot aver the East fi}ixn (1 S) &xt for driveway Putposes• Proposed Parcel A Deacdptton: The West 85.00 fcet of the North ono-half (N 1/2) of l.ot 9, Auditor's Subdivision No. 88 according to ihe plat tf�reof on file and of recaad in the Office of the Registrar of Deeds in and fa Anoka County, MinnesWe. �C R EqTE / Z� ORA/Nq6E Propo�ed parcd g Descriptton; & �T��'!Ti EASE�FNT ��OD°��N1/2)ofLd9,Audito�s S Subdivision No. 88 lying East of the Wect 83.00 feet of said Lot 9, PFR C i t �r R EQ� I RE �l�V 15 +�adu�8 to We plat tlkreof on file and of recad in t6a O@ice of 6�2 s�s9 7J.r1••. �� of ueeds m aod for ,4iw�ca couity, Minaaoti Mattke Engineering, Inc. 7671 Central Avenue NE Fridley MN 55432 I hereby certffy that this 9urvey wes prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Registered Lond Surveyor under the lows of the State of Minnesoto. ' � w �T.� (e,z) �ea—oaoo R�y��p p�R c irY co��►a�+� Tedd W. Mettkt, RLS 6��qq Tl�- Dats: s-� �/99 Mtnn. Reg. No. 15612 _ / .� �- s� CITY OF FRIDLEY 6431 UNIVERSITY AVENUE FRIDLEY, MN 55432 (612) 571-3450 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBDIVISION APPLICATION FQR:: Plat �c Lot Splif PROPERTY INFORMATION: - site plan required for submittal, see attached �- Address: �, ' V � P S�: /� . � . Pr��y +�'pntifica#�en �;�;�►�er: I ��_.�iQ.�_ , ,.y _ _. Legai Desc:ription: Lot �0 _ Block Tracf/Addition � "1 _ .�1 I.. �� _ _ 1�: �.. : n . . .l� L��,. � . ,� / �1 , r _ �.� O' ? Current Zoning: � Reason for Subdivision: Have you operated a business in a city which required a business license? Yes No ✓� If Yes, which city? If Yes, what type of business? Was ihat license ever denied or revoked? Yes No ��......��_�_�_��..�_��__��_.r..._ FEE OWNER INFORMATION (as it appears on the prope�ty title) {Contract purchasers: Fee owners must sign this form prior to processing) NAME: �U.�CIJ� T. L � ��' ADDRESS: 13 a it,ll SS S I S-' �� • iD �- DAYTIME PHONE: 5�1f -$5 OS SIGNATURE/DATE: > u-- ' °` � � ...�..,,��.......,,....:_..��..��......��..,�...�.,,...�.,.�.,.��......��..�..��.,.��......�� a+•s r. IYi'�IV�C. /) ADDRESS: �3'� DAYTIME Pf �ON ,t sT AV�- 04« SIGNATURE/DATE: FEES Plat: $500.00 for 20 Lots, $1 b.00 for each additional lot Total Fee: Lot Split: $250.00 � Receipt #: u�a 7-7 Received By: Application Numb�f�g-U / . � Scheduled Planning Commission Date: Scheduled City Council Date: ` 10 Day Applicat3on Complete Noti cation ate: c.enP_ j�.; 9�f -. 60 Day Date: _�sc� . a�, 9 9 ` 35 � � �,y. � �.; : q-. k ;::. K: � �.+. MEMORANDUM PLANNING DIVISION Date: 7/15/99 To: William Bums, City Manager �� From: �arbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Amendment to the Comprehensive Sign Plan for University Business Center M-99-170 INTRODUCTION In 1983, the City Council approv�ed a comprehensive sign plan for University Business Center located at 7920-7954 University Avenue. Between 1983 and 1990, this original sign plan was supplemented by a sign plan for 8100 University, as all of the properties befinreen 7920 and 8100 were owned by Steiner Development. Recently, Duke Realty purchased the buildings between 7920 and 7996 University Avenue. Duke Realty has asked to deve(op sign criteria specific to their development. SUMMARY Code Section 214.14, requires shopping centers and multiple tenant buildings to have a comprehensive sign plan approved by the City: The purpose of this requirement is to assure that centers have a well planned, aesthetically pleasing appearance. Historically, this building's owners allowed individual gold letters for their tenants. Duke Realty prefers white letters against the dark brick background. Note, certain tenant spaces have been identified to have 36" intemally lit letters. All other tenants will have letters that are a maximum of 24". The petitioner is aware that all signs must not only meet their criteria, but City ordinances as welL PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the University Business Center (7920-7996 University Avenue) Compret�ensive Sign Plan. 36 L7NIVERSITY BUSINESS CENTER Fridley, MN. GENERAL #1) Tenant at Landiords option, may display an exterior sign. All such signs sha11 be subject to the requirements and limitations as outlined hereafter. The furnishing and installation of a sign and the cost incuned shall be the responsibility of the Tenant. #2) Tenant's sign shall be identity only and shall not include any specifications of the merchandise offered for sale or the services rendered therein. Character, design and layout of signs shall be subject to the written approval of the landlord. #3) Tenant shall be allocated an azea on the exterior fa�ade of the Center to identify their Business consistent with Exhibits B& C auached hereto. #4) No sign shall be placed in fina.l position without the written approval of the landlord in addition to a City of Fridley approved sign permit. #5) Upon expiration or early termination of the Lease Term, Tenant sha11 remove the Sign and repair all damages to the building caused thereby at his/her own expense. #6) Alteraxion, repair or replacement of existing non-conforming signs sha11 be made in conformance with specifications outlined in this sign criteria. #7) All non-conforming signs shall meet the performance standards of this Sign Criteria as leases aze renewed by Landlord. SIGN CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS Tenant signs shall consist of Neon channel letters mounted on raceway (Exhibit B) or Formed plastic letters mounted on rail system (E�ibit C) as described below. All signs shall be fabricated -.-:-- and installed in compliance with specifications outlined as follows and with all applicable municipal and electrical codes. 37 ILLUMINATED LET'TERS E7�-IIBIT B) Illummated tenant signs shall consist of individually illuminated letters with White 3/16" Acrylic faces and 1 1/8" White edge trim. Letter returns will be fabricated .040 White aluminum with 5'/a" retum depth. Letters will be internally illumina.ted with neon contained ful-ly within the depth of the letter. Brightness shall not exceed 100 foot light lamberts. Individuai letters and electrical components shall be mounted to 8" X 8" raceway, ra,ceway will be finished to ma,tch . color specification provided by landlord. Only the raceway shall be mounted to the building fa�ade. Illuminated letters sha.11 not exceed 24" in height and shall be moun#ed 12" below the top . of the metal fa�ade cap. A second horizontal row of 24" letters maybe installed as such thax the second row of 24" letters would be 6" below the upper row and 12" above the lowest point of the fa�ade. Tenant sign shall be placed 24" inside either side of lease line or in area designated by Landlord. *Tenants located in shaded area per the attached site plan (Exhibit A) will be permitted letters 36" in height and shail be mounted 12" below the top of the metal fa�ade cap, A second horizonta,l row of 12" letters maybe installed as such that the second row of 12" letters would be 6" below _ the upper row a.nd 12" above the lowest point of the fa�ade. Construction and installation specifications same as above. NON-ILLUMINpTED FORMED PLASTIC LETTERS EXHIBIT C Non-illuminated tenant signs shall consist of individual formed plastic letters mounted on r�il- system. Letters will be finished White. Individual letters shall be mounted to clear polycarbonite ra.il system. Oc�ly the rail system will be mounted to the building fa�ade. Non-illuminated letters shall not exceed 24" in height and sha11 be mounted 12" below the top of inetal fa�ade cap. A second horizonta.l row of 24" letters maybe installed as such that the second row of 24" would be 6" below the upper row and 12" above the lowest point of the fa�ade. Tenant sign sha.11 be placed 24" inside either side of lease line or in area designated by Landlord. PROHIBITED SIGNS # 1) The following types of signs or sign components shall be prohibited. a. Paper or cazdboard signs, stickers or decals used as signs, letters, symbols or identification painted directly on any surface of the premises. b. Signs of temporary character or purpose. Auxiliary signage used for grand openings or special events is subject to Landlord and municipai approval. ° c. Moving, flashing or flickering lights. d. Flood lighted signs. e. Hanging signs of any type, SIGN APPROVAL PROCEDURE Tenant shall submit to Landlord (3) sets of drawing and specifications. The dra,wings shall clearly show location of sign on the fa�ade, construction and attachment detail. Landlord will provide written approval or disapproval within (7) seven working days of receiving drawings and specifications. Subject to city approval. : 07/16/98 15:44 FAI 8125432887 DURE CONS7RUCPION � 002 �J W � _ W V � � � W > � go� � •o NN� t/1N0 K � W � �� o� � �� C 0 C z � �� r T �I� � p N C � a H � � � � � 0 � -� � � � v � � � � � � Q �� C ��p U �� m EaEN�'�jaE�i/ � � YJ r -��p�,, w u� o ��L m- Z.� m O V � � � Q) � � � °' � � C O C G � = V t� m ��¢ d� � O V �' u�' ZJ�� Z � � o 1 _ -� � . j � � � � i�+ i� a� V � a .Q � � G; � ..., � � .p � � > d � v � � � � I� l� �� c � � , � � � I � � a � E� �� h '�� h � ` � ^�, � ! �� o` 'c • m C M O � � � � Z W � � J vi J o Q � � m �� :• � �� W� 4�J � � m° Z • 7 y c Wa 2M C� � � r- �� W� O .- MEMO�.ANDUM PLANNING DIVISION DATE: July 19, 1999 , TO: William W. Burns, City Manager � �� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator � � Paul Bolin, Planner SUBJECT: Michael Servetus Unitarian Church Annual Labor Day Auction Banner We have received a temporary sign permit application from the Michael Servetus Unitarian Church, 6565 Oakley Street N.E., to display a temporary banner over Mississippi Street at approximately Able Street. This banner will advertise the church's annual Labor Day auction. The dates of the banner display is August 25 — September 7, 1999. The church has submitted its required $200 deposit. If there are no Council concerns regarding this request, we will issue the temporary sign permit to Michael Servetus Unitarian Church. PB\jt M-99-171 41 � � CffY OF FRIDLEY To: From: CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26, 1999 William, W. Burns, City Manager ��` � Sara S. Hill, Human Resources Director Date: July 20, 1999 Re: Resolution to Increase Employer Health Insurance Premium Contributions As you are aware, Health Insurance premiums aze rising dramatically next year. The City of Fridley has chosen the Self-Insurance option for its employees for the 1999-2000 plan year. This option appears to be the best one for the City at this time. Although it is the least expensive option at this point, the City will still experience a rather dramatic increase in its pr�miums. In order to relieve the burden of these costs for our employees, it may be appropriate to increase the Employer Contribution as of 9/1/99, the date that the new plan year and new premiums go into effect ($607.00 for dependent coverage and $272.00 for single coverage). 1 am recommending that we increase the Employer's Contribution from $378.00 to $488.00 per month for dependent coverage and from $230.00 to $29a.Q0 per month for single coverage. Although the employees will still experience an increase in their portion of the premium ($94.00 to $134.00 per month), the increase is not devastating. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 42 RESOLUTION NO. -1999 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN EMPLOYER HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUM CONTRIBUTIONS FOR FOR THE 1999-2000 PLAN YEAR WHEREAS, it is the intention of the Fridley City Council to provide fair and equitable benefits to Fridley City Employees within budgetary constraints; and WHEREAS, the City Council and City Staff have ceviewed the City's financial position as well as economic indicators and Employer Health Insurance contribution adjustments by comparable emp(oyers; and WHEREAS, an adjustment of Employer Health Premium contributions is warranted; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley that the following adjustments and changes be authorized for employees of the City of Fridley, effective September 1, 1999: Increase in Employer Health Premium Contributions (Option A of our Flexible Benefits Plan) from $378.00 to $488.00 per month for dependent coverage and from $230.00 to $290.00 per month for sinale coverage. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1999. DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK 43 NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR �' AGENDA ITEM f CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26, 1999 CRY OF FRIDLEY CLAIMS • • - - - . . • � • • • � . . � � GTY OF FRIDLEY Type of License CIGARETTE SALES AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26, 1999 Total Station #5678 6101 University Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Holiday Stationstore # 118 200 - 57`" Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55437 FOOD SALES Avanti Petroleum, Inc. 6101 University Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Holiday Stationstore #118 200 - 57`" Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55437 PEDDLER/SOLICITOR Licenses � Avanti Petroleum, Inc Holiday Stationstores, Inc Corporate Offices Holiday Stationstores, Inc Dominion Business Promotions Michael Dean Lerux 300 North Rosewood Office Plaza Roseville, Minnesota 55112 Southwestern Company 2451 Atrium Way Nashville, Tennessee 37214 RETAIL GASOLINE SALES Avanti Petroleum, Inc. 6101 University Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55432 Holiday Stationstore #118 200 - 57�' Avenue NE Fridley, Minnesota 55437 Alex Bueno Corporate Offices Holiday Stationstores, Inc. 45 Approved By Police Department Fire Department Community Development Police Department Fire Department Community Development Police Department Fire Department Community Development Police Department Fire Department Community Development Police Department Community Development Police Department Corrtmuni±y Development Police Department Fire Department Community Development Police Department Fire Department Community Development Fees $125.00 $125.00 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 60.00 N/A (Interstate) $ 60.00 $ 60.00 Type of License � BLACKTOPPING Blacktop Paving of Minnesota Inc PO Box 49398 Blaine Mn 55449-0398 Lilas Anderson GAS SERVICES Advanced Energy Services Inc 3650 Annapolis Ln N STE 105 Plymouth Mn 55447 Gary Weber Cronstrom's Heating & AC 6437 Goodrich Ave St Louis Park MN 55426 Peter Rice Dependable Indoor Air Quality Inc 2619 Coon Rapids Blvd NW Coon Rapids MN 55433 James Holt GENERAL CONTRACTOR-COMMERCIAL Dahl Steve Construction 16630 Jaguar Ave Lakeville MN 55044 SteE�e Dahl Koser Kompany 860 86 Avenue NE Coon Rapids MN 55433 Jack Kozar NE Commercial Services 6525 Central Ave NE Fridley MN 55432 James Grabowske Prestige Pools 3 E Little Canada Rd Little Canada MN 55117 Pat Henry GENERAL C4NTRACTOR-RESIDENTIAL Ace Construction 8c Roofing (20001884) 6017 167 Ave NW Ramsey MN 55303 David Archambault Amek Construction (20164402) 6440 Flying Cloud Dr Eden Prairie MN 55344 Mike Jackson f�i•J Approved By RON NLKOWSKI Building Official RON JULKOWSKI Building Official Same Same RON JULKOWSKI Building Official Same Same Same STATE OF MN Same Type of License � GENERAL CONTRACTOR-RESIDENTIAL (CONT.) Cedar Pointe Construction (20122346) 2200 W 66 St STE 182 Minneapolis MN 55423 Roland Nelson Cornerstone Construction (5257) 1588 Middleton Ave St Paul NIN 55102 Bill Nichols First Landmark Builders (1992) 611 Snelling Ave S St Paul MN 55116 Pat Markowski Home Remedy Inc (20086880) 26516 Vickers St NE Isanti MN 55040 Brian Hogie Huber Construction (20102687) PO Box 403 St Michael MN 55376 Joe Huber Lee Steven R Contractor (5758) 9465 Irving Ave N Brooklyn Park MN 55444 Steve Lee Merchants Maintenance & Const (4359) PO Bos 49963 Blaine MN 55449 Bruce Bogie Petersdorf Company (193 8) 1628 122 Ave NE Blaine NIN 55449 Paul Petersdorf Savage Construction (20157183) PO Box 71 PequotLakes MN 56472-0071 Tony Savage HEATING Advanced Energy Services Inc 3650 Annapolis Ln N STE 105 Plymouth Mn 55447 Gary Weber Cronstrom's Heating & AC 6437 Goodrich Ave St Louis Park MN 55426 Peter Rice 47 Approved By Same Same Same Same Same Same Same Same Same RON NLKOWSKI Building Ofiicial Same Type of License HEATING (CONTINUED) Dependable Indoor Air Quality 2619 Coon Rapids Blvd NW Coor. Rapids Mn 55433 Total Refrigeration Systems Inc 221 S Concord Exchange S St Paul MN 55075 PLUMBING Roto Rooter Services 14530 27 Ave N Plymouth MN 55447 Schnapp Plumbing 682 125 Ln NE Blaine MN 55449 Shiloah Water Co Inc 7319 166 Ave NW Ramsey MN 55303 � James Holt Richard Madsen Dave Smith Ken Schnapp Ed Dery . � Approved B_y Same Same STATE OF MN Same Same : AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL ME`�TING OF JULY 26, 1999 GT'Y OF FRIDLEY ESTIMATES Carl J. Newquist, Esq. Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered 301 Fridley Plaza Office Building 6401 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 5�432 Services Rendered as City Prosecuting Attorney for the Month of April, 1999 .............................................. $ 17,347.67 Bituminous Roadways 2825 Cedar Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55407 1999 Street Improvement (Sealcoat) Project No. ST. 1999 —10 Estimate No. 1 ...................................................................................... $ 54,199.63 ' � MEMORANDUM - DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: July 19, 1999 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Application For Special Legislation Background During the 1999 Legislative Session, the City of Fridley received a$500,000 appropriation for design and engineering fees for the Trunk Highway 65 additional lane project. The legislature specified this appropriation for the City of Fridley, in response to the Medtronic Inc., redevelopment project. The funds were allocated to the Department of Trade and Economic Development budget. In order to properly request reimbursement for expenses, the DTED staff has advised the City that an application process similar to the Minnesota Investment process must be followed. A public hearing has been advertised for Monday's meeting. In addition, an action item is scheduled for the same evening to pass the appropriate resolution to authorize the City Manager to file the application to DTED to execute the appropriate agreements. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing regarding the proposed application for a special legislative funding for the Trunk Highway 65 Highway Improvement Project Design Fees. The draft copy of the application is attached for the Council's review. B D\jt Attachment M-99-172 50 ��NESOT � � Trade � , conor�� Develo me��.� p Business & Community Development APPL,ICATION FOR SPECIAL . LEGISLATION STATE FORM Please submit one copy of the application to: Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development Business and Community Development Division 500 Metro Square 121 East 7th Place Saint Paul MN 55101-2146 651/296-5005 1-800-657-3858 - TTY/TDD: 651-297-5353 Fax: 651-296-5287 51 CITY INFORMATION 1. City Name: Fridley Contact Person: Barbara Dary, Community Development Director Address: 6431 University Avenue NE City/State/Zip: Fridley, Minnesota, 55432 - County; Anoka Phone: 612-572-3590 Fax: 612-571-1287 2. Financial Officer: Rick Pribyl, Finance Director Address: Same as above City/State/Zip: Same as above Phone: 612-572-3520 Fax: Same as above 3. Minnesota Tax Identification Number. 80-30-301 Federal Identification Number: 41�00-7700 4. Legislative District for Project Area: Congressional District 6 Name of State Representative: Representative P1ice Johnson (District 48B) Name of State Senator. Senator Steve Novak (District 52) 1 52 GENRAL PROJECT INFORMATION A public hearing is required to provide citizen notification and im+olvement prior to submitting the application. Submit a copy of the public hearing minutes, a copy of the public notice and affidavit of publication, and the L.ocal Govemment Resolution. To be provided after July 26, 1999. 2. Will the proposed project create increased costs for business and residents? -Yes_ No X: If yes, describe how the aff'ected paroies have been informed of the increased costs. - 3. Will the praject result in the loss or diminution of ivetlands? Yes X No_ . If yes, describe the measures which will be taken to mitigate all functional values of the wetlands that will be lost or diminished. While a full engineering analysis and wetiand delineation has not been performed, as of yet, it is likely that there will be some impacts to wedands. The State and the City will compty with existing state and local requiremenis for wetland mitigatioq and replacement if necessary. 4. Will the Froposed project be located in a flood plain? Yes X No_ If yes, is flood insurance required? Yes_ No X Hare state environmental review requirements been met, if applicable? Yes_ No _ Not applicable. The length of the project is below 1 mile which is the threshold for environmental review. 53 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR SPECIAwL .LEGISLATIVE FUNDING FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND `ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND AUTHORIZ(N�.E�CECUTION OF THE /�GREEMENT _ BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley act as ihe legal:sponsor for the.project-contained in the application for special legislation to 1��: submittsd on July 27,..1999, and ti�at William W. Burns, City Manager is hereby authorized to apply to the Departrnent of Trade and Economic Development for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Fridley. BE IT FURTT-�R RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of the proposed project for its design life. BE IT FURTI-iER RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley has not violated any Federal, State, or local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, kickbacks, collusi�q conflict of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice. BE IT FURT'�IER RESOLVED, that upon approval of its application by the state, the City of Fridley, may enter into an agreement with L'�e State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project(s), and that stated in all contract agreements and described on the Compliance Section Page 4 of the Business and Community Dsvelopment Application. NOW, T�REFORE BE 1T RESOLVED that William W. Burns, City Manager or his successors in office, aze hereby authorized to execute such agreements, and amendments thereto, as aze necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 26`� DAY OF JULY, 1999. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK 54 NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR PROJECT CONIPLIANCE Section 504 of the Federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), MN Statutes 1990, Chapter 363, Chapter 363 MN Human Rights Act —� Require that all public facilities and programs be designed and constructed xo be accessible to the physically handicapped. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) and subsequent regulaiions-::It ensures access to facilities or programs regardless af race, color, national origin, orsex. : Executive Order 11246, as amended by Executive Orders 11375 and 12U86 and subsequent regulations — prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. 4. Executive Orders 11988 and 12148, Flood Plain Management — Requires action to minimize the impact of floods on assisted projects. 5. The Flood insurance Purchase Requirements Section 102a of the flood Disasfer Protection Act of 1973, (P.L. 93-234) — Requires the purchase of flood insurance in communities where such insurance is available for construction or acquisition projects in any area. having special flood hazards. Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.871 applies to this project. T'his statute requires of recipients of state assistance to pay the prevailing wage rate to laborers and mechanics at the project construction site when state funds are provided for constru�tion in the amount of $200,000 or more. 7. Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended and executive order 12259 — Requires equal opportunity in housing and non-discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and actions to affirmatively further fair housing. 8. Age Discrimination Act of 1975 — Prohibits discrimination on the basis of age. 9. Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.87 and 471.88 — Forbids public officials from engaging in activities which are, or have the appearance of being, in conflict of interest. 10. Antitrust or unfair trade practices laws — Regulates and controls the sale of goods and services and prohibits deceptive and unfair competition between businesses. 11. Minnesota Statutes 290.9705 — Requires that 8 percent of each payment paid to out-0f- state contractors for work in Minnesota must be withheld on any contracts Lhat exceeds or could reasonably be expected to exceed $10,000, unless the requirement is waived. �,�� ,� Certifies compliance as so stated in the accompanying (Signature of Applicant) ^ "Local Government Resolution." 4 55 PROJECT NARRATIVE The City of Fridley requested Siate assistance in the 19991egislative session in order to initiate the design and engineering work on a projeci which would add two through lanes on TH 65 from the CSAH 35/I.ake Pointe Drive intersection north to: the: East Moore Lake Drive intersection. The project is:unique becanse TH 65 traverses Moore Lake and will require "sheet pile walls" in order to avoid adverse impacts to Moore Lake. The necessity for the project was determined as a result of two traffic studies, one completed in 1996 by the City of Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority, and a more recent study completed by SRF Consulting Group Inc. on behalf of Medtronic Inc. Medtronic Inc. has recenuy initiated conswction on its worid headquarters c�mpus at the northwest corner of I�94 and TH 65. The site is served by Lake Pointe Drive and is immediately adjacent to the subject "causeway". Both studies indicate that by the year 2010 the traffic growth in the immediate area, or "through" traffic will cause the intersection at TH 65/Lake Pointe Drive/CSAH 35 to operate at a level of service F during the aftemoon peak hour. Simply put, there is too much traflic during the aftemoon peak hour northbound on TH 65 from points south heading north on TH 65 through Fridley. In addition to the background traffic in the general vicinity of TH 63, the new : 4edtronic campus will create additional traffic: Medtronic hopes to construct at least 1,000,000 square feet of corporate office space and aeate 3,000 new jobs. In order to correct this problem, an additional northbound through lane and an additional southbound through lane are proposed to be conswcted along the length of the project. Staff at MnDOT has indicated their support of the project in meetings with City staff. They have requested, however, a feasibility study regardi�►g the proposed construction method to add the new lanes. A"sheet pile wall" method is proposed so as to not impact the lake or the ordinary high water line, and, at the same time, provide the additional area for new northbound and southbound lanes. The Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority has already contracted with appropriate consultants to obtain a preliminary analysis on the suitability of the soils along the causeway as well as to develop a preliminary layout of the road design. To date, early reports show that the soils aze suitable for a sheet pile wall design Because of the nature of sheet pile wall conswcdon, however, the consultants will need to analyze how the sheet piles are anchored along the causeway and how they are anchored at either end of the causeway as the road bed transitions from the lake. It is also proposed that the addidonal lanes will be lined with concrete curbing along the shoulder. Currendy, runoff from the roadway sheet flows direcdy into Moore Lake. The road design will also include a storm water treatment rystem that will treai the runoff from the highway. The Rice Creek Watershed District staff has also been advised of this project and the Watershed District will have to approve the project's storm design and treatment methods. The estimated cost for adding two additional lanes of traffic`on the causeway using a sheet pile design is S6 million. It is estimated that the design can be completed within S 1 million and the engineering and inspecdon of the project is estimated at SS00,000 for a total design and construction cost of 57.5 million. Federal funding will be sought for the construction funds. A"local match" of 20% of the const�uction costs is required, and the Federal funds wi11 provide the remaining 80%. The design and engineering fees are the responsibility of the local governtnents, which in this case, will include MnDOT and the City of Fridley. The federal funding applicarion is now being prepared and will be submitted in late August 1999. � A cooperative agreement will also have to be executed with MnDOT as to the local match The amounts shown on the ne.rt page in the "Source and Use Statement" have been proposed to MnDOT and are now being reviewed by MnDOT. 5 56 SOURCE AND USE STATEMENT *The City of Fridley will solicit the Request for Proposals for the engineering firm to complete the final design of the project. The State's funds would reimburse the City's expenses for this activity. COST ESTINIATE Attached to this appliration is the supporting information regarding the cost of the project. The ccaasulting engineer for the preliminary feasibility study regarding the st�eet pile wall design authors the first letter. The second letter is authored by the City's Public Works Director. 57 07/25/99 THU 09:01 FA% 851 490 2150 SEH � 002 r .�r r 3535 VADNAIS CENTER ORNE, Z00 SF.F! CENTER. ST. PAUL. MN 551 f0 65149p-2L100 90032.rr2QS5 AfiCNITECT!!RE • ENGINEERIlYG - ENVIqONMENtAt • rTTANSP�ATAT�ON July 14, 1999 Ms. Barbara Dacy Community Deveiopment Directar City of Fridley 6431 Universiry Avenue Northeast Fridley, NiN 55432 Dear Ms. Dacy: RE: City of Fridley TH 65 @ Moore Lake SEH No. FRII5L9OpY.pp` spcv As requested, we have dsveloped a very rough cost estimat�for the project on TH 65 at Moore Lake. The project scope is cucrently being screened and a preliminary investigation into the feasibility of the sheet pile wall is underway. There has been no greliminary design work completed at this time for which to base a construction estimate as it relates specifically to this project, The foiiowing estimate represents gcnerally accepted iules of thumb for costs of constirucdon and percentages of other related project costs. Roadway Reconstnictioa Sheet Pile Wall Constzuction Storm Seaer and Pond Construction Subtotal Construction Cost 25% Admiruistiation, Legal and Engincecing Tatai Project Cost �� .� �� .. �� i�� Please contact me if I can be of further assistaa,ce. I can be reached at 651-490-2018. Szncerely, ' Y � �,�.yB,� sa.n M. Mason, P.E. Sr. Project Manage� SHORT E1110�7' HENpR1GK50N INC. M/NNEAPOLIS, MN 8T, CLOUD. AMV CHfPpE'Wq pp(,(rc yy� �0�� W/ tAKECOtlN7Y, IN EOWL OPPURTU�,OYER _ _ CITY OF FR[DLEY FRIDLEY �tUNICIPAL CENTER • 6431 UNNERS[TY AVE. IY.E. ERIDLEY. M1Y �5�132 •(612) 571-3�i50 • EAX (612) 571-1287 Mazch 30, 1999 Mr. Richard R. Stehr, PE Mn/DOT Metro Engineer 1 S00 W County Road B2 Roseville NIN S5 I I3 Subject: TH 6S fl�nding Deaz Mr. Stehr: PW99-043 As a result of the increasing congestion on TH 65 and future predictions on the further development north of �Yidley and Medtronic's Corporate Headquarter's proposed construction at the northwest quadrant of I-694/TH 65 intersection, a�ansportation problem has been identified on TH 65. The development's transportation study indicates the traffic on the TH 65 corridor intersections will degrade from a Level of Service (LOS) C to LOS F by 2010. This degradation of traffic flow can be improved with the widening of TH 6S over the Moore Lake causeway and the dedication of HOV lanes for the rush hour periods. It is estimated that the widening of the traffic surface on the causeway can be accomplished using a sheet pile design so as not to impact the ordinary high water line of Moore Lake at a cost of $6 million. It is estimated that the design can be completed within $1 million and the engineering constzuction and inspection of the project is estimated at $500,000 for a total design and construction cost of $?.S million. A federal 80% contribution funding request for the project is being submitted, zeducing the remaining funds amount to $2,T00,000. It is proposed that as a minimum, MnDOT shaze in the remaining funds 50% ($1,350,000). It is suqgested that MnDOT would provide the engineezing construction support and an additional $850,000 towazds the project. The City would contribute the remaining amount for the improvement. ' Initial coordination with the DNR and the Rice Creek Watershed District indicates there aze no major probl�ms that car�not be addressed with the construction. Accordingly, the design can be initiated in the year 2000 with the construction to be completed in the yeaz 2001. The City requests MnDOT's support of the proposed trunk highway improvement and concurrence in the concept contribution to the federal participation project for the TH 65 roadway improvement. Sincerely, �'" �� ;� john G. Flora Director of Public Works JGF:cz cc: Robert Brown 59 MEMOR.ANDUM � : PLANNING DIVISION Date: 7/15/99 � To: William Burns, City Manager ,� From: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator Paul Bolin, Planning Assistant RE: Planning Commission action on SP #99-04 M-99-167 INTRODUCTION The City of Fridley has been asked, by Jeff Vogel of Grace Evangelical Free Church, to grant a special use permit allowing an addition to their current church facilities. Churches are a permitted special use in the R-1 zoning district, and the additions proposed by the church comply with the requirements for the special use permit, subject to the stipulations suggested by staff. Staff has met with the church architect to ensure that final building designs will be more architecturally compatible with the surrounding neighbofiood. The current proposal has been somewhat modified from its ariginal form, however; staff continues to be concerned about the scale of the east face relative to the homes, east of the church site. Staff continues to work with the architect related to their concerns about the appearance of the gymnasium's exterior and its relationship to the architecture on the remainder of the complex. As a solution, staff recommends that the east face of the 3-story administration - building be broken into horizontal stepped components with the first story being closest to the east neighbors, second story stepped back (west) to relieve the mass and third story stepped back further. The impact to the building's overall floor area does not need to be substantial, but enough to reduce the visual impact of 3-stories 80' from its single-story neighbors. �� Memorandum Staff also suggests that banding, which relates to the horizontal steps of the administration building, be carried over to the walls of the gymnasium building. The architects have discove�ed a way to reduce the overall height of the proposed administration building by 3'. They have also proposed windows in the gymnasium and brick banding on the lower portion of the gymnasium wall. They have reported _: however that the church resists the idea of "steps° from a cost, space, and future maintenance perspective. Staff beiieves these to be valid concems, however, the concems can aD be ... managed through careful design and construction techniques. In light of church concerns, staff believes the stepped approach is essential to the approval of this special use permit. Therefore, staff suggests that the stipulations regarding these issues remain as presented to and endorsed by the Planning Commission. These stipulations make the Special Use Permit approval contingent on staff approval of the east elevation design prior to issuance of a building permit. PLANNING C_OMMISSION ACTION At the July 7, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for SP #99-04. Neighborhood concems included the height and lack of architectural elements of the proposed buildings. After much discussion, a motion was made to approve Special Use Permit, SP #99-04, to allow the expansion of the educational and gymnasium space of Grace Evangelical Free Church, with stipulations. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends that the City Council concur with the planning commission and grant the proposed Special Use Permit, SP #99-04, as presented. 1. The petitioner shall place an adequate number of spruce trees along the portion of the eastem property line, where only bushes currenUy exist, to provide property screening for neighboring property. A landscape plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Newly created parking spaces shall be lined with concrete curb and shall be properly striped to accommodate the required number of parking stalls. 3. The drive on the east side of the church shall remain a one-way with angle parking. 4. Special Use Permit, SP #83-0, shall be replaced by Special Use Permit, SP #99-04. The petitioner shall construct a gymnasium out of the same exterior materials as those proposed to be used on the proposed administration/education building. The exterior elevation plans for the gymnasium shall be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a building permit. • 61 City of Fridley Land Use Application SP-99-04 July 7, 1999 GENERAL INFORM�ITION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Jeffrey Vogel Grace Evangelical Free Church 755 NE 73`� Ave. Fridley, NIN 55432 Requested Action: Special Use Permit Purpose: To expand a church use in a R-1 Single family residential dist�ict Rxi.ctin� Zp�g: R-1 (Single Family Residential) Location: 755 73`� Ave. NE Size: 132,000 square feet 3.03 acres Exis�ng I,and Use: Church facilities. Siurounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family & R-1 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Warehouse & M-2 W: Madsen Park Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Sections 205.07.1.C.(2) requires churches have a special use pernut when located in an R-1 Distric� Zoning History: 1964 - First building permit issued 1983 - SP#83-13 granted for addition. 1990 - SP#90-02 granted for daycaze. Legal Description of Property: Metes & bounds description. (See attached) 62 Public Utilities: Water and sewer are available at the site. Transportation: 73rd Avenue provides vehicle access to the site. Physical Characteristics: Lot is relatively flat, covered by existing church buildings, parking lots, and landscaping. SiJ1VIMARY OF PROJECT Grace Evangelical Free Church is requesting a special use pernut to allow the expansion of the educational, adminis�trative, and gymnasium space of a church SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS Ciry Staff recommends approval of this special use permit. Churches are a permitted special use in the R-1 zoning district, and the expansion proposed by Grace Evangelical Free Church complies with the requirements for the special use pernut, subject to the stipulations suggested by stai� CITY COUNCIL ACTION Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin Memorandum 6. The petitioner shall step the east wali of the administration/education building to create a scale more compatible with the residential properties east of the church site. The "stepped" building plan shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of the buiiding permit. 63 SP 99-04 Analvsis City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit. Churches are a permitted special use in the R-1 zoning district, and the expansion proposed by Grace Evangelical Eree Church complies with the requirements for the special use pernut, subject to the sripulations suggested by staff. The proposed 183 parking stalls are more than adequate to meet the code required 150 parking stalls.. In addition, Grace Free Evangelical Church has staggered service and class times to alleviate current :- pazking problems and ensure adequate parking for their congregation. The layout of the parking lot allows fire trucks to adequately circulate through the property for fire protection. City engineering staff has reviewed the drainage plans for this site and deternuned them to be adequate for a development of this size. Site line drawings, provided by the church, indicate that the proposed addition will have some impact on the neighbors to the East. The three neazest homes are more than 80' from the proposed addition. Staff has discussed design modifications to the east face of the building with the architect. In addition to design modifications, existing landscaping will help to fiuther minim;�e views of church expansion. In addirion to the existing large trees and landscaping, the church will be adding 8 Goilflame shtubs to the front of the expanded education building. The church will also be putting in additional large spn�ce trees along the portion of the Eastem properiy line, where only bushes currently exisrt. Additional '' °-� -- -.... , .. __ .� ..7 Spruce to be planted here � . �, '�°;� ' F: . ,� � �, z ' �. � � .. �� . , � �-�: - �4 µ`�i� ` .. ..' - ___ - 1 t �: View of Eastern Properry Boundary St1p1111t1OIIS Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the special use pemut subject to the following stipulations: 2. � Church slaal.l place an adequate numbe: of spruce trees along the portion of the EasCern property line, where only bushes cutrenfly exist, to provide proper screening for neighboring properly. A landscape plan shall be submitted and approved by City staffprior to issuance of a building pernut Newly created parking azeas shall be lined with a concrete curb and shall be properly striped to accommodate the required number of parking stalls. Drive on East side of Church to remain a one-way drive with angle parking. Special Use Permit SP#83-13 shall be replaced by Special Use Permit SP#99-04. � �:: , -�, g , �- k "� ,: _,�-=: 1 : - . {�� 3' � � � � � �Li ..��_ Yt... �7 es; § � � � �+ I _ � I,I , i i. � �I � � t� .� .. �. � Fe� � # s ��r^ `,i`h:� �� i � . T- � t . �` _ i�:' �� , � �� -- �� ' � �� _�� i A � Q � � � �� ` ��. �� M ;`jr). -.;y�- - �::.� �;: k �' � ! �::� �,:.., � �~ ��: , -��:: �� }; > I ••.4.M1.t : �}:• I � I � � � ' �� b�• ! I �� ;�� 1 j 1 �� i o .� � �� : � �� •:......... @ . � 3,� ' �:v' ��`"`. . ::^: t::'.:f::�' -�'. .�-.- . r�.�.�.��. "�°� --�e� _ �, ....,.,. ,,,,,,,""""„'� - e� ;�r�;��°�, ''��, a \ . � �' , ; ', � f V :� ,� ,�t.. J �, • � ` ! • \ . . } `, , .1� li f � ... 9 ^`,, ,` �� L', e � ' _,�$Q�','�!ll�n� . ��' '`, �; ;�,,y. ' �`�; „ 'S. .,. �^,P. w ,, � i- � � , . f'�•.t; : ,' f:�, �� ,,�; .,: ••;� . �, 1,�. ': `, ,� . � , �T , i�°: , . , � ;, .t� . � • < ti �� .:^�• Ns. , :t .r•i�., , � � , '� �; �. �. �si i!`',, � ° ,. • . � .': � . ,��`� vi , � '', ., � ' ". n ., . , � � �";•� T • �i . ;�� k _ � �`� ' aa�i � �il��l�i��1��►��. '' '�'�� Ii�: r �; :� '"E � y . �,.: �,��"�, ��l�Ullfi�id�N ! i .6�1i� _ � ;;a, ; r .�;�� ,z� , ..�;* � � :, ,�� , ,:t� � � �,�;��j ��y�PJIN� � �.� � �� _ s�� ,� �� .� ,�,� . �, �, s �'?t�f �`i�i6��l�idi�l�' f�i��, _�. ,: ; �� , :;:-� „ �: ' . � � i�v� 5' "! ��i' � •�; tC � f. 'i;�� j.jl.� .�,� ,�IA`� .,�,, U��l,�1►1 'i!��' , �:�� . : «.....; �:;�� :'� � ��' " m � ;' _, x ` +�,•,ti ��t_.. �'r � � , ' . � u ..i.f.�� ..wJM1 . ' . �� •` � n�•��1. :,t :;'� . '� ^ �.L,�' �� .tr r� � �� , �,�';y� � � ,�` �� o�a 1 ;,f�.: . `.1 . %� } �,'4( �+,'.�',,;,�F';�y� `.V�� . . , � . � � �,� ati3 . � �, � . y ; �,a,��?; .. ��w.,::�,� � *�� f �� +� .,,t. � }� �� • 1� \'�., I W�r� � `� , • 1 �� ` • • • � � � w�� j . ' �, : � � � � :�r��r„"d �I` \' ' � ' • �� _ ��? : ` , .,,��7. /,�. �i. ` . . i�e . � � � . � �s ;: , 1~ yc � � . �' ; � : i .� •'�;i:� JUN-30-99 WED 01�02 PM WELSH CONSTRUCTION CORP. FAX N0, 6128977869 P. 02 m � � ..� � �� 0 -v �... i r-� � f�l C� --{ n i • : � . 06iO3i99 09:0? SCIMED t�W MODALITIES -+ 98977704 JUN-02-1999 WED 02�30 PM 5666 L[NCOLN DRIVE FA`� Nt1. 6128977869 CITY O� FRIDIEY r 6431 UNIVERSiTY AVENUE � FRlOLEY� MN 55432 (612� 571 •3450 COMMUN�TY DEVELOPMENT bE ARTMENT SPECIAL USE PERMlT APPLI Residentia� S-�cond Acces� �RSJPERTY INFORM/��lQN_- site pl�n .required far s� Address: __ '7 SS � 73''d � � Property Identification Number: E�� 3o ay i y tegal0escription: lot etock TracdAddi _�,7�f Rr aF w+�z ,�F E r�z oF N� s�y Current Zoning: ' S uare faofagelacreage: ,� Reason for Special Use: � o� ._ _.G A,DD1T o�i � � t ��a.ciclw►_ -._ ATlON F�R:; �� Others nittaf, see attached �........_.. N0.969 �02 P. 02/02 Have you operated a business in a city which requi�ed a�ousi�ess �+cense? Yes No _� If Yes, which city? _� .__ If Yes, what lype of business� � ____ Was Ihat license ever denied or revoked? Yes _..__,_.� No r �ti�tilrl�wlti��►rtitiv�v��r�r�r�rl�s ��vlr�rtiv�rvvtivv�r s ti tit � FEE OWNER iNFORMATION (as it appears on the prop (Contract purchasers: F�e owners must sign this form p NAME: r�i� L�va,yt�,elt ut! FrcG G�uu ADDRESS: �SS �v� 7��. . OAYTIME PNONE: 7�Y- 719 � SIGNATURF![ �_.....��....�� ' NAII/�: - G'>'t�'� �� `�.c � ��e G�euv� ' ADDRESS: ►� � � OAYTIME PHONE: -7 SiGNATURF! . �Y �I��IS StiStititi�rti�w�V1,tA.r�N�r�rtirr.�ryl�rNNlr�r�rrr�r ti�rti r �r � Section o�f City Code: ' FEES .._. .. ..... . ' Fee: 3100.00 Resid�ntia( Second Acce so�y ' licalion Numbe�• �' �` p �P �� 99- ! Recei t i�: �(� � Roce � Scheduled Pianning Commissivn Oate: � Scheduled City Council Date: _. 99 i 10 Day Applicatio� Complets Notif ation Oate: �,,,j ; 6Q Day Date: ; i • ' � title) t� processing) TE: . �. �-�„� 6�si�s ti��rti�.��tiv�r� .00 �,.,,,,,,,_,_, Qthers ey: ` :'�; ARCHITECTURE ARCHITECTS • DESIGNEflS • PIANNEflS emo To: Scott Hickok, Planning Coordinator; City of Fridley From: Scott Roberts, Genesis Architecture CC: File Date: 06/04/99 Re: Project Narrative, Grace Evangelical Free Church, Fridley, MN The proceeding narrative is for the Conditional Use Permit, Grace Evangetical Free Church Addition in Fridley, MN. Grace Efree is requesting a CUP for a net 10,000 SF building footprint expansion that would include additional classrooms, new administrative space and a gymnasium. As part of the expansion app�oximately 8,688 SF of existing cnurch space would be demolished and replaced with new. I would like to make the following points conceming the proposed expansion: • The expansion complies with the City of Fridley Code regarding a church use within a residential neighborhood. • Construction is within setback limitations. Additional buffer between parking and neighbors to the east is maintained. • Parking continues to comply with city code of one stall per 5' of pew length. • The current Sunday schedule of two sessions of worship and bible school happening simultaneously has maximized the parking Iot. Their current schedule is in direct response to a lack of bible school space. With expansion they could go back to the more traditional schedule of worship /bible sch�ol/worship. This would alleviate the parking impact as experience has shown. Please see attached email for attendance information. Please review the site plan and building perspective for additional project information. • Page 1 7� -----Original Message----- From: Vogel, Jeff (maiito:VogeiJCa�bsci.com] Sent: Friday, December 11, 1998 4:40 PM To: 'Gavin, Maurice' Cc: 'jhvogei@me.umn.edu' Subject: RE: Grace E-Free, Fridley Maurice - Please forward this to Scott. Scott - Here is a summary of my view of our parking situation. About 6 years ago, we re-arranged our Sunday morning program schedule to allow us to increase our building usage and allow for more peaople in Sunday morning classes. The result has been an increase of about 50 in classes on Sunday morning, from around the 220-250 range to 270-300. Even with this schedule, though, we are again stressing our classroom capacity, and have not found a way to progarm the class time in such a way that there would be room for further increase. There is still room to grow in the worship services, however. The previous schedule was a worship service at 8:30, classes at 9:45, and a second worship service at 11:00 (with limited pre-school classes). The current schedule is one worship service with a few classes at 9:00-10:00, and a second service with a full set of classes at 10:30-11:00. We recognized at the time we made the schedule change that this arrangement would stress our parking capacity, but we believed we had some available capacity at the time and that the increase in class capacity was worth it. The 30 minutes (theoretically) between services was intended to minimize the overlap in parking lot usage for people attending only one hour. Under our current schedule, we believe the parking lot is basically full on days where we reach our peak attendance levels. On such days, the first hour probably sees 250 in worship and 50 in classes, and the second hour about 200 in worship and close to 300 in classes. The parking lot is most full, I think, during the second service, and not during the cross-over time. When the lot is full, it is probably very close to the rated capacity, with an additional 5-10 cars parked off-site. Current peak attendance: worship classroom total 9:00 250 50 300 10:30 200 250 450 With an expanded facility, our primary constraint would no longer be class space, but parking. In my opinion, we would need to consider changing to a schedule that reflects this constraint. A schedule we would likely consider is the pre-1992 schedule described above. Under that schedule, we would expect to be able to accomodate twice the number of people in worship, with no more people in the building at the same time than we have today. The attendance profile would be expected to look something like this: Proposed expanded peak attendance: 71 8:30 worship 450 9:45 classes 550 11:00 worship 450 With this schedule, we would need to nearly double our current classroom capacity for us to reach the same number of people in building at one time as we have now. There would be some challenges with the shorter cross-over times for parking, but these challenges do not seem too difficult to me. On Wednesdays, we currently have 250-300 people in the building at a time, with a significant number of children who are dropped off and don't require parking. I believe that with current parking we we could accomodate at least 600 people in the building at a tirne on Wednesdays, provided the class-room/gymn space was available. At present, the building is very full on Wednesday nights with perhaps half the parking lot empty. I hope this is helpful. Jeif Vogel °T2 MEMORANDUM DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: July 19, 1999 TO: William W. Burns, City Manager �� FROM: Barbara Dacy, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Application for Special Legislative Funding from DTED and Authorizing Execution of the Agreement Staff recommends the City Council approve the attached resolution authorizing the City Manger to submit the appropriate application to DTED in order to receive $500,000 of special legislative funding for the Trunk Highway 65 design budget. A public hearing item was scheduled earlier in the agenda. B D\jt Attachment M-99-173 73 RESOLUTiON NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPUCATION FOR SPEC1i4L LE�15tATiVE FUNDING FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND .'ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND AUTHORIZING E�CECUTION OF THE AGREEN[E�1T`. '�� BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley act as the legal sponsor for the project contained in the application for special legislation to be submitted on July 27, 1�99, and'that William W. Burns, City Manager is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Trade and Economic Development for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Fridley. - BE IT FURTF-�R RESOLYED, thai the City of Fridley ha.s the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of the proposed project for its design life. BE IT FURTi�R RESOLVED, that the City of Fridley has not violaied any Federal, State, or iocal laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice. BE IT FURTi-IER RESOLVED, that upon approval of its application by the state, the City of Fridley, may enter into an agreement with t�'�e State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project(s), and that stated in all contract agreements and described on the Compliance Section Page 4 of the Business and Community Development Application. NOW, THEREFORE BE 1T RESOLVED that William W. Burns, City Manas�er or his successors in office, are hereby authorized to esecute such agreements, and amendments thereto, as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 26`� DAY OF NLY, 1999. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK 74 NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR � f QTY OF FRIDLEY Z'�: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26, 1999 The Mayor and City Council William W. Burns, City Manager � -� July 22,1999 First Reading of Franchise Fees Ordinance Since our public hearing on July 12, 1999, I have had an opportunity to address Councilman Billings' concerns regarding the definition of customer classifications. Our City Attorney, Fritz Knaak, recommends that we adopt the language included in a new Subsection 3 of Section 409.02.This language simply states that the customer classifications are those defined by the two companies and approved by the Minnesota Public Utility Commission. The subsection also requires the City to maintain and make available copies of these definitions. Alternatively, we could incorporate specific customer category definitions in the ordinance or include them in an appendix to the ordinance. The problem is that these definitions are subject to change. Fritz also has separate concerns with adopting an appendix to our codified ordinances. In an effort to clarify these definitions, I have spoken to representatives of both NSP and Minnegasco this week and have drafted my own definitions. I have given special attention to the definition of residential customers. I hope these efforts help. 75 Definitions of Customer Classifications NSP Residential - Any customer who lives in a private residence that is served by a separate electric meter. This would include renters. If a renter is not served by a sepazate meter, the landlord would be billed at the appropriate commercial/industrial rate. There are 11,375 of these customers in Fridley. Small CommerciaUIndustrial With No Demand Charge - These aze customers that have single ar three-phase non-demand metered electric service where the maximum monthly demand requirement is less than 25 kilowatts. There are 851 of these customers in Fridley. Small CommerciaVIndustrial With Demand Charge - These are customers that have single or three phase demand metered electric service where the monthly demand requirement is less than 100 kilowatts. The demar.d charge far a C!I customer constitutes 40 tcr b0 % of their bill and is based on the demand for electricity during the highest 15 minutes of usage each month. There are 448 of these customers in Fridley. Large CommerciaUIndustrial - Secondary - These are customers that have single or three phase demand electric service where the monthly demand requirement is more than 100 kilowatts. These secondary customers use single or three-phase power at a rate up to 2400 volts. There are 119 of these customers in Fridley. Large CommerciaUIndustrial - Primary - Same as above except that these customers use three-phase power at a rate of 2,400 to 69,000 volts. There are 13 of these customers in Fridley. Minnegasco Residential - Any customer who lives in a private residence who is served by a separate gas meter. This would include renters who are separately metered. If renters are not separately metered, their landlord would be charged at a residential rate for four units or less. The appropriate commercial/industrial rate would be applied where there are more than four units that are not independently metered. Minnegasco has 8,103 residential customers in Fridley. CommerciaUIndustrial Firm A- These customers use less than 1500 therms per year. There are 353 of these Minnegasco customers in Fridley. CommerciaUIndustrial Firm B- These customers use 1500 to 4,999 therms per year. There are 296 of these Minnegasco customers in Fridley. CammerciaUIndustrial Fir�r C- These customers use 5,000 therms or more per year. There are 331 of these Minnegasco customers in Fridley. 76 Dual Fuel A- These customers must maintain adequate standby facilities that will allow them to maintain operations during periods of curtailment. They use less than 120,000 therms per year. There are 37 of them in Fridley. Dual Fuel B- Same as above, but these customers use more than 120,000 therms per year. There are 17 of them in Fridley. LVDF or Large Volume Dual Fuel - Same as above, but these customers use more than 2,000 therms per day. There are 11 of them in Fridley. 77 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE CITY CODE TO INCLUDE A NEW CHAPTER 409, ENTITLED "FRANCHISE FEES" THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY ORDAINS: SECTION 409.01. PURPOSE The Fridley City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose an equivalent franchise fee on all entities groviding electric and gas service pursuant to franchise within the City in accordance with the franchise agreement entered between the City and each such energy supplier. The franchise fee is paid as full compensation for the rights to transmit and distribute electric or gas energy for public or private use within and through the limits of the City as permitted by the respective franchise of each energy supplier. The equivalent fee was determined in advance by the City based on each energy suppliers' estimated Gross Revenues so that the fee paid by one Customer Classification is in all material respects the equivalent, based on a percentage of the estimated Gross Revenues for the Customer Classification, of the fee paid by each similar Customer Classification(s) of the other energy suppliers. SECTION 409.02. FEE SCHEDULES 1. Minnegasco Coinpany Gas Service Fee Schedule. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Minnegasco Company for its gas franchise granted by the City in the following amounts and as defined in Section 7 of the parties' Franchise Agreement. Customer Classification Residential Firm A Firm B Firm C SVDF A SVDF B LVD Amount per Month 3% of customer's monthly gas bill $0.87 per month 2.82 per month 13.18 per month 26.59 per month 147.50 per month 150.00 per month : 2. Northern States Power Company Electric Service Fee Schedule. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Northern States Power Company for its electric franchise granted by the City in the following amounts and as defined in Section 9 of the parties' Franchise Agreement: Customer Classification Amount per Month Residential 3% of customer's monthly gas bill Small C/I & Municipal, no demand charge $1.90 per month Small C/I & Municipal, w/demand charge 12.50 per month Large C/I Secondary 93.00 per month Large C/I Primary 150.00 per month 3. Definition of Customer Classifications. The classifications on which these fees are based shall be those established by Rzliant Energy Minnegasco and Northern States Power and approved by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. A copy of these customer classifications shall be made available upon request by the City at City Hall during normal business hours and posted on the City's internet site. SECTION 409.03. PAYMENT Said franchise fee shall be payable to the City quarterly. The payment shall be due the last business day of the month following the preceding quarter of the calendaz year and shall be based on the electric or gas set-vice provided for the preceding quarter of the calendar year. Each energy supplier shall furnish with each payment a statement of the amounts collected by customer classification for the period on which the payment was based. Each energy supplier shall permit the City and its representative free access to supplier records for the purpose of verifying such statements. SECTION 409.04. REDUCED OR REBATED RESIDENTIAL FEE FOR ECONOMIC HARDSHIP A whole or partial rebate for citizens with an economic hardship is available from the City. A hardship shall be determined by examining the relationship between the previous year's income and the Federal Poverty Guidelines as annually established and published in The Federal Register by the United States Department of Health and Human Services. A hardship shall be _ deemed to exist when the annual gross income of the household for the previous year is less than the Federal Poverty Guidelines of the current year. If an economic hardship exists, the amount paid by the household shall be rebated by the City to the household within a reasonable time after the end of the year within which the fee was paid. 79 SECTION 409.05. ENFORCEMENT Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this Ordinance, shall be resolved in accordance with dispute resolution provisions of each energy supplier's Franchise Agreement. SECTION 409.06. EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective 60 days after notice enclosing the adopted ordinance has been served on each energy supplier by certified mail. Collection of said fees from customers shall commence with the beginning cycle of supplier's next full billing month following the expiration of the 60 day period. P�SSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF , 1999. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK Public Hearing: July 12, 1999 First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: :1 NANCY J. JORGENSON - MAYOR � � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 26, 1999 C1TY OF FRIDLEY �NFORMAL �TATUS REPORTS :,