03/26/2001 - 4743� �c
� FRIDLEY CITY COIINCIL MEETING � "
� a� ATTENDENCE SHEET
- Ma�.day, Mcucch 26, 2001 '
7:30 P.M.
PLEASE PRINT NAME, ADDRESS AND ITEM NUMBER YOU ARE INTERESTED IN
ITEM
PRINT NAME (CLEARLY) ADDRESS NUMBER
. t� yy� � �i ��— �G � �,�1� �' . d-' C. � ` e ��ds c y�
. � �
, ,. � � - ��=� C ". ;� � �e. �-� 3� �:� E.� � �'' .
� �� �� t�
.�
� �-�; � �,�. . �
�
� � r , ,
1 �
�� �� C. �> � �i� �5;� � � �. � : � Z-
,�- ���,�� �,�,� � �� �- ���,.;� , � ��, i� ��� L.� �'l %nti; l 2_
/'U `%� �'�/'��/��� �Dc� Z✓i��a�-�1�. ; �����i�GD,. %� /�
�`�� � � � 33 S� u--t� .�e;�°�c��fi % S�}- �ewf> � Zooa
J � i v� 1n-� 6� i S h.(, 7�1 �S ' 'Z_ � c�--
• - �f 4.5 �, Ivt. r-t-1� iS r:� �c:� S t-- �
Cl.-' "— C_ � � � � ,J `� �, �-f� Z i
.�` /
lC? ` L, ��'S C''N (� s sG� s� i s o I3L c�� /�� �� �/ �
- , ��.�`r. • o� i�L.[?,r� ��1� � �
� � �� � � � �.J 1 � J % � !l/ ��ON �
f.�J�-� � C� �' G��-. C� �� S�—"
� ,��, �� ' /' �j � 2�,� �-� -� a�1.—� � �
�
L2. s �(��'-�-�� „ � `' � ,�-�%���C3 L���'�'� ����L�� ��
� :�,� � 0 1 � `�!�. . y,,� . �. ,�,��,�.� ��
_. � ��s �,4�-
�. �� �
�n � C h �,^c��wf 3� (p ��� �� l
� �Z�� � �= � <_ � � �'����'� � ,r ✓-�����
f _ �,r � -- �-
,^ ;, �3
f
�
�z-c, ��:�-�° �3 (i �,� � �-�-c
�� (1� (j � �`'i � � C� �.�.� 4��
2 ��� ` �G z��- C� �� �� � - ,-��
� �
�
�
CtTY OF
FRIDLEY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
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 disabilities to
participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an
interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at
572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of March 5, 2001
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Second Reading of an Ordinance Recodifying
Fridley City Code, Chapter 205, Entitled
"Zoning" by Adding a New Section 205.31,
0-6 Residential Lots Created Prior to 1955
District Regulations (Zoning Text Amendment,
ZTA #00-04, by the City of Fridley) ..................
............................................. 1 - 7
2. Second Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the
City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by
Making a Change in Zoning Districts (Rezoning
Request, ZOA #01-01, by Gateway East
Redevelopment, LLC) (Ward 1) .................................................................... 8- 10
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001 PAGE 2
NEW BUSINESS:
3. Resolution Approving a Plat, P.S. #00-03
(L & L Builders Addition), by L& L Builders
to Replat Property for the Purpose of Creating
Lots to Allow Construction of a new Single
Family Home, Generally Located at 35 `•
62"d Way N.E. (Ward 3) ................................................................................ 11 - 17
4. Resolution Ordering Final Plans and Estimates
of Costs Thereof: Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 2001 —1 .......................................................................................... 18 - 19
5. Resolution Ordering Improvement, Approval
of Plans and Specifications and Orderinq
Advertisement for Bids: Recarpeting Municipal
CenterProject No. 339 ................................................................................. 20 - 23
6. Establish a Public Hearing for April 23,
2001, to Consider the-Intoxicating Liquor ' ___ _
License Application of King Club and
Restaurant, Generally Located at 1051
East Moore Lake Drive (Ward 2) .................................................................. 24
�_
7. Motion to Support the Leasing of the
Islands of Peace Visitor Center by Anoka
.
County to Tamarisk Resources -
.................................................................... 25 26
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001 . PAGE 3
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
8. Appointment — City Employees ..................................................................... 27
.
9. Claims .........................................................................:................................. 28
10. Licenses ....................................................................................................... 29 - 33
11. Estimates ...................................................................................................... 34
ADOPTION OF AGENDA.
.,
� OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: Consideration of items not on Agenda — 15 minutes.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001 PAGE 4
PUBLIC HEARING:
11. Consider Stinson Boulevard Street Improvement
ProjectNo. ST. 2001 — 2 .................................................................................... 35
REVOCATION HEARING:
12. Consider the Revocation of the Tobacco
License for Walgreen's Drug Store,
Generally Located at 6525 University
AvenueN.E. (Ward 1) ....................................................................................... 36 - 42
OLD BUSINESS:
13. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending the
Fridley City Code to Add Chapter 223,
Concerning Manufactured Home Parks,
Requiring Owners to Pay Relocation Expenses
to Displaced Residents Upon Park Closings ...................................................... 43 — 51
and
Approve Official Title and Summary Ordinance ................................................. 52 - 53
.-
14. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending
Chapter 7 of the Fridley City Charter
Pertaining to Taxation and Finances
(Tabled March 5, 2001) ...................................................................................... 54 - 56
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001 PAGE 5
NEW BUSINESS:
15. Consider Tobacco License Request by Dennis �
G. Buchanan ...................................................................................................... 57
.
16. Consider Reappointments to City Commissions ................................................ 58 - 59
17. Informal Status Report ....................................................................................... 60
ADJOURN.
�
�� f ��
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
c���
�
��
�
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 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 shoutd contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
r,� 5. Resolution Ordering Improvement, Approval
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: ��.,��� of Plans and Specifications and Ordering
Advertisement for Bids: Recarpeting Municipal
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: �.� Center Project No. 339 ............. 20 - 23
City Council Meeting of March 5, 2001 \�p ��
OLD BUSINESS:
Second Reading of an Ordinance Recodifying
Fridley Ciry Code, Chapter 205, Entitled
"Zoning" by Adding a New Section 205.31,
0-6 Residential Lots Created Prior to 1955
District Regulations (Zoning Text Amendment,
ZTA #00-04, by the City of Fridley) . 1- 7
��d �� �9
2. Second Reading of an Ordinance to Amend the
City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by
Making a Change in Zoning Districts (Rezoning
Request, ZOA #01-01, by Gateway_East
Redevelopment, LLC) (Ward 1) .. 8 -10
Or d /l,�O
NEW BUSINESS:
��� 3. Resolution Approving a Plat, P.S. #00-03
(L & L Builders Addition), by L& L Builders
to Replat Property for the Purpose of Creating
Lots to Allow Construction of a new Single
Family Home, Generally Located at 35
62"d Way N.E. (Ward 3) ............... 11 -17
��'" 4. Resolution Ordering Final Plans and Estimates
`� of Costs Thereof: Street Improvement Project
No. ST. 2001 —1 ......................... 18 - 19
6. Establish a Public Hearing for April 23,
2001, to Consider the Intoxicating Liquor
License Application of King Club and
Restaurant, Generally Located at 1051
East Moore Lake Drive (Ward 2) ... 24
7. Motion to Support the Leasing of the
Islands of Peace Visitor Cenier by Anoka
County to Tamarisk Resources ... 25 - 26
Appointment — City Employees ... 27
9. Claims ......................................... 28
10. Licenses ...................................... 29 - 33
11. Estimates .................................... 34
�a � ' t� +
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
ADOPTION OF AGENDA. .�� � ��
��
OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: Consideration of
items not on Agenda —15 minutes.
Ul-�l � 0
���.
PAGE 2
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
OLD BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
14. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending
Chapter 7 of the Fridley City Charter
Pertaining to Taxation and Finances
(Tabled March 5, 2001) .. .................. 54 — 56
v��c��P��'��
NEW BUSINESS:
15. Consider Tobacco License Request by Dennis
PUBLIC HEARING: G. Buchanan ................................ 57�
11. Consider Stinson Boutevard Street Improvement """ �� �"' ���b ��u �a
Project No. ST. 2001 — 2 .................... 35
��� � r� p-� � � �-E:� ap�,
� �� �� �'��� � �
�' . �,P � 16. Consider Reappointments to City
.,� ��L�� �, �1P,�S ���-� ���°d ��P � Commis 'ons . .......... 58 - 59
(�...................... .
REVOCA ION HEARC G�� �^� �� �P P� ��
�, 12. Consider the Revocation of the Tobacco �/,(� ��S�- �.. �-� �-'
License for Walgreeh's Drug Store, �� L�/'��"� ��
Generally Located at 65�5 University �' �� a,o(S �✓��
Avenue N.E. (Ward 1) ....................... 3- 42 17. Informal Status Report ....................... 60
5 �' � p �' �-� �P� ' ���`�5 � _
�- �" �..�.
� �-�
� '
S�`A� �ot�- �� �d�P��o�- ��.,��c,.3i-a�� Gbl-D�
�' �e.,�� /�;pr-. �l �" �r�v ( c�J a� �"�-� �r. ( 2-�03 ��i►+.� o� (}� ` �
d ,� �„ � �- - � �► � �!
,�.n.e,e� p�l� r u� fe"^'�`}-� �Df a- �' '� ��ADJOURN `` /
OLD BUSINESS: � � j U ,� ( � �
. �
13. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending
the Fridley City Code to Add Chapter 223,
Concerning Manufactured Home Parks,
Requiring Owners to Pay Relocation
Expenses to Displaced Residents Upon
Park Closings ..a��...��. JC. f.......... 43 — 51
and
Approve Official Title and Summary
Ordinance ............................ 52 - 53
��(�j C�pp�V� �—� �,,t��J� 1� C)
3
S p� ,�.,� S�� � p��1►� A c� S� �-�g--"
.
THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL
OF MARCH 5, 2001
The Regulaz Meeting of the Fridley City Council was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:30
p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
� Mayor Lund led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund, Councilmember Barnette, Councilmember Bolkcom,
Councilmember Billings, and Councilmember Wolfe.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of February 26, 2001
APPROVED.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. ORDINANCE NO. 1148 AMENDING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE CREATING
CHAPTER NO. 129 PERTAINING TO TRESPASSING ON PRIVATE
PROPERTY:
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that this ordinance would allow property owners of
certain types of properties to exclude individuals who have committed a crime on that
property or have violated its rules of conduct from entering that property. Tenants may
also issue trespass notices. This also applies to areas of the property with restricted
access. The property owner or tenant issues written trespass notices within 30 days of
violations. A violator is not allowed to enter the property for up to one year. If they do,
the police may be called for assistance, and the violator may be charged with a
misdemeanor. This ordinance will prevent someone who has been evicted from a
property from returning to that property. This situation often occurs with drug houses.
. Staff recommends approval of the second reading.
WAIVED THE READING AND APPROVED ORDINANCE NO. 1148 ON THE
� SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 2
2. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE
CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA, BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZOl�TING
DISTRICTS (REZONING REQUEST, ZOA #O1-Ol, BY GATEWAY EAST
REDEVELOPMENT, LLC) (WARD 1) (TABLED FEBRUARY 26, 2001)•
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that Gateway East Development, LLC, is seeking to
rezone property generally located at 57�' and University Avenues to S-2, Redevelopment
District, in order to accommodate the development of 28 two-bedroom townhome units.
The City Council held a public hearing regarding this matter on February 26, 2001. The
Council tabled action on the rezoning and directed staff to amend the text as necessary to
allow action on the item on March 5, 2001. Staff modified the text of ZOA #01-01 to
reflect the modifications identified by Council. Item "F" was added to include all vacated
right-of-ways. Staff recommends approval of the first reading of the ordinance as
amended.
WAIVED THE READING AND APPROVED THE ORDINANCE ON FIRST
READING.
3. RESOLUTION NO. 15-2001 TO VACATE PORTIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY
SERVICE ROAD AND 57 PLACE, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTHEAST
OF 57 AVENUE AND UNIVERSITY AVENUE IN ORDER TO
ACCOMMODATE THE GATEWAY EAST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
(VACATION REQUEST, SAV #Ol-01, BY GATEWAY EAST
REDEVELOPMENT, LLC) (WARD 1) (TABLED FEBRUARY 26, 2001)•
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that Gateway East Redevelopment is seeking to vacate
portions of the University Service Road and 571h Place in order to accommodate the
development of 28 two-bedroom townhome units. The City Council held a public
hearing regarding this matter on February 26, 2001. The Council tabled action on the
vacation request pending modification to the description of the right-of-way to be
vacated. Council directed Staff to amend the description as necessary to allow action on
the item on March 5, 2001. Since Council's last meeting, Staff has approached the owner
regarding acquisition of the vacated right-of-way, agreed to a purchase price, and agreed
to terms of acquisition. Staff has also modified the description of the right-of-way to be
vacated by SAV #O l-O 1 to reflect the changes identified by Council. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution as amended.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 15-2001.
4. ESTABLISH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR APRIL 9, 2001, TO CONSIDER
MODIFICATIONS TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCE DISTRICTS 7 AND 9:
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that at their March 1, 2001 meeting, the HR.A approved
a chronology of ineeting dates and actions to respond to pending legislation contained
within Senate File 73 currently under consideration in the State legislature. The proposed
legislation seeks to limit a municipality's ability to utilize the funds generated by TIF
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 3
Districts created prior to May 1, 1990. As you are aware, any modification to the City's
TIF Districts requires a public hearing, approval of the Council, and action of the HRA.
The proposed TIF modification will not change the geographic boundaries of the
districts. However, it will change the individual budget within each of the districts.
Action by both the City Council and the HRA will be required prior to April 30, 2001.
Staff recommends that the City Council establish Apri19, 2001, as the public hearing date
to consider modifications to Tax Increment Finance Districts 7 and 9.
SET THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR APRIL 9, 2001, TO CONSIDER
MODIFICATIONS TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCE DISTRICTS 7 AND 9.
5. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR SA1vITARY AND STORM
SEWER LINING PROJECT NO. 337:
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that out of the three bids submitted Lametti & Sons,
Inc., was the lowest at $151,522. The 2001 budget allocates $180,000 for this project.
Staff recommends that Council receive the bids and awazd the contract to Lametti &
Sons, Inc., in the amount of $151,522.
RECEIVED BIDS AND AWARDED CONTRACT FOR SANITARY AND STORM
SEWER LINING PROJECT NO. 337 TO LAMETTI & SONS, INC.
6. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACT FOR REPAIIZ OF WELL NOS. 5
AND 9:
Mr. Burns, City Manager, stated that out of the four bids received for Well 5, Bergerson-
Caswell was the lowest bid at $63,855. Four bids were received for Well 9. The lowest
bidder was Keys Well Drilling at $16,905. The total cost is $80,860. We budgeted
$65,000 and there is $50,000 available from other budgeted 2001 capital projects that
were completed ahead of schedule in 2000. Staff recommends that Council accept the
bids and award the contracts to the lowest bidders.
RECEIVED BIDS AND AWARDED CONTRACT FOR REPAIR OF WELL NO. 5
TO BERGERSON-CASWELL.
RECEIVED BIDS AND AWARDED CONTRACT FOR REPAIR OF WELL NO. 9
TO KEYS WELL DRILLING.
7. APPOINTMENT:
Mr. Burns, City Manager, sta.ted that staff is requesting approval of the appointment of
Paul Bolin to replace Scott Hickok as Planning Coordinator. Paul began employment
with the City in 1998 working as a Planning Assistant/Planner. His responsibilities will
include supervising the review process for development plans and applications,
researching and developing land use ordinances, assisting the Community Development
Director, and supervising the Planning Division.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 4
Mr. Burns sta.ted that staff is requesting approval of the appointment of Stacy Bulthuis to
the position of Planner. Stacy began employment with Fridley as a Planner/Code
Enforcement Officer on June 19, 2000. Her responsibilities will include assisting in
review process for development applications and preparing case files, site plans and staff
reports. She will also administer sign permit procedures, work with the public,
contractors and businesses in resolving development issues, and complete GIS projects.
APPOINTED PAUL BOLIN TO THE POSITION OF PLANNING
COORDINATOR AND STACY BULTHUIS TO THE POSITION OF PLANNER.
8. CLAIMS:
APPROVED PAYMENT OF CLAIM NOS. 98330 THROUGH 98458.
9. LICENSES:
APPROVED ALL LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE IN THE
LICENSE CLERK'S OFFICE.
10. ESTIMATES:
Frederic W. Knaak, Esq.
Holstad and Knaak, P.L.C.
1690 Minnesota World Trade Center
30 East Seventh Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
Services Rendered as City Attorney for the
Month of February, 2001: $5,000.00
No persons in the audience spoke regarding the consent agenda items.
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the Proposed Consent Agenda. Seconded by
Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt the Agenda. Seconded by Councilmember �
Wolfe.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 5
OPEN FORUM, VISITORS:
Joan Olson, 6320 Van Buren, stated that she came across a beautiful house plan for $270,000 but
it could not be built in Fridley. In the model home section of the paper 50 to 75 percent of the
houses could not be built in the City of Fridley. The reason for this is that the garages extend
more than five feet in front of the house. In lieu of the fact that the housing in Fridley is middle
age, she would like to believe that the City's thinking has expanded over the years. Fridley needs
bigger, better, and brighter homes for the people who do not want to leave Fridley but want a
different home.
Mayor Lund stated that some from the City Council or staff would get back to Ms. Olson. He
thanked Ms. Olson for coming to the meeting.
Mr. Peter Rolstad, 7471 Jackson Street, stated that he represented Spring Lake Hockey. They
are looking to sell meat raffles in the bars to benefit the hockey team and the community. They
would donate ninety percent (90%) of the profits back to the community, mostly to the schools.
Ms. Linda Rand, Shorewood Pulltab Operator Representative, stated that they are asking to do
the same as the other restaurants, bars, and legions are doing with meat ra�fles.
Mayor Lund stated that the City would be looking into that.
Ms. Rand stated that they were wondering if they should continue selling the meat raffles until
the City Council decides if the ordinance will be changed.
Mr. Knaak stated that he is doing an analysis of the City's ordinances. He is going to make a
recommendation of how they should be enforced. The City's position would be consistent with
State law and there are two separate ordinances. He is not going to tell them to do anything right
now except to obey the law.
Ms. Rand asked if they would be okay if they stayed within State guidelines.
Mr. Knaak stated that they would, but City ordinances can be more restrictive than state law.
Mr. Rolstad asked if the Legions and VFW's are running a tri-wheel within City ordinances.
Mr. Knaak stated that he could not tell him.
Mayor Lund sta.ted that they do. It fa11s under the City ordinances that Mr. Knaak referred to.
There are two separate ordinances and there is a discrepancy. There may be some need for
review of the ordinances.
Councilmember Billings stated that one ordinance is a club ordinance that regulates what can be
done in organizations with a club license. That would be the American Legion, the VFW, and
the Knights of Columbus Hall. They can do anything that is legal in the State of Minnesota. The
on-sale liquor establishment ordinance states that the only gambling that is legal is pull-tabs.
�
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 6
Mr. Peter Eisenzimmer, 6535 Oakley, wondered why the ordinances that come up get pushed
back to the end of the meetings a11 the time.
Mayor Lund asked if he was refemng to the public hearing coming up in the next few minutes.
Mr. Eisenzimmer stated that he was talking about the Chapter 7 hearing.
Mayor Lund stated that they would be getting to that as soon as possible.
Mr. Pat Carline, 5705 Jackson St., stated that the removal of the salvage yards seems to be a
done deal. The image of the City as a grand old city seems to be driving what is happening here.
It is pushing the HRA and the Council. It is wrong because government is doing something they
should not be doing. He is for simplified government, but not for real estate development. This
project will not pay for itself and will cost money. At the HRA meeting, they were even talking
about taking money from other TIF districts to recover some of this loss. He does not think that
anyone looked to see if this was proper. The salvage yards are not targeted by the PCA at all.
There was pollution at the gas station for the Gateway East project and apparently it is being
ignored. are ignoring it. The money would be well spent to help those viable businesses. The
City should not interfere with the free market economy. In the Star Tribune a few weeks ago
there was an article about Minnesotans dumping their garbage on Wisconsin land and filling up
their landfills. Someday we will all have to take care of our own cars and garbage. Someone has
to take care of all these cars, and the salvage yards are doing a public service. They are not
pretty businesses but you could work with them toward installing better privacy fences,
improving landscaping, and possibly helping with pollution problems. What else will we do
with the cars? We must recycle.
Mayor Lund stated that the City Council and the HRA will have a joint meeting about this on
Apri15. He stated that Mr. Carline is welcome to attend the meeting and discuss this matter.
Mr. Carline stated that everyone agrees to the removal of the junkyards in spirit.
Councilmember Barnette stated that they closed five in Andover in the last two years. He asked
where they moved.
Mr. Carline stated that one of them is doing business in Fridley. Most of them went out of
business and got paid millions. The Gateway East project is estimated at $1.00 per square foot.
The junkyards' estimate is $1.75 per square foot.
Mayor Lund stated that this is an issue that was just brought forward and it will take the normal
course of action. He suggested that Mr. Carline attend the HRA meeting.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the City Council/Commission survey that is done every
year stated that this is a priority, so it is not just staff driven.
Mr. Carline stated that morally and ethically speaking, the question about the junkyards should
not have been asked.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 7
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that vision meetings for the planning process identified this as
an issue that needed to be worked on.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
11.
CONSIDER
e�v �uniNANCE RECODIFYING FRIDLEY CITY COD]
CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED "ZONING" BY ADDING A NEW ���:tivl� �v�.'l,
0-6 RESIDENTIAL LOT EXT AMENDMENTOZTA 00-04, BY THE CITY
REGULATIONS ZO1vING T
OF FRIDLE� (CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 5, 2001):
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to remove this item from the table. Seconded by
Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING A�NG wASOPENED AT 8: 2 p MD THE
M O T I O N C A R R I E D A N D T H E P U B L I C H E A R I
Mr. Bolin stated that this is a special zoning district that protects existing smaller lots in Fridley.
This applies to lots created and recorded in Anoka County prior to December 29, 1955, between
5,000 and 7,500 square feet in size. The minimum lot width is 50 feet. This will not create new
lots and will only deal with existing lots. The main reason for this district is to protect the
existing housing stock and remove the non-conforming status from those properties. This would
encourage reinvestment in the older neighborhoods. There are 191 lots citywide that meet the
requirements. They aze all located outside of the Hyde Park addition. Most are developed with a
home on them, but four of them are vacant. The Riverview Heights neighborhood is the location
of 127 of the lots and the four vacant lots. Since the February 5 meeting, staff and the GIS
division conducted fieldwork to locate the number of properties meeting the criteria. The vacant
properties are at 611 Buffalo, 630 Ely 5treet, 513 Paramount, and 571 Lafayette. The standards
for homes created now or to be rebuilt in case a home burns down on one of these properties is
that the lots need to meet the size criteria for square footage and lot width. The new h�eee
would need to maintain the 25 foot front and rear yard setback and for an attached garage,
would need to be a 15 foot rear yard setback. The minimum home size would need to be 768
square feet with 30-foot height restrictions.
Mr. Bolin stated that in Fridley for the existing lots created before 1955, we require a 75-foot lot
width and a 7,500 square foot lot size. Columbia Heights also has a 60-foot minimum lot width
and a 6,500 square foot lot size. Minneapolis is down to a 40-foot lot width with a 5,000 square
foot size. Richfield allows a 50-foot minimum lot width and a 6,000 square foot lot size. St.
Louis Park allows a 50-foot lot width with a 6,000 square foot lot size. We did not look at the
50-foot lot width and the 6,000 square foot lot size because it did not fit the properties we are
trying to protect. In Richfield, the majority of the properties they were trying to protect were
6,000 square feet in size.
Mr. Bolin stated that on January 17, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
duration of the overlay district. The February 5 City Council public hearing was held and
continued until this meeting to clarify the data. This overlay district protects existing homes and
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 8
will encourage reinvestment in Riverview Heights. It gives flexibility in developing and
rehabilitating homes. Staff recommends approval of this ordinance.
Mr. Mike LaFave, 640 Dover Street, stated that he has two 25-foot lots. If they were allowed to
be combined, a buildingable lot, 50 feet by 110 feet would be created. About ten yeazs ago, there
was a 50 feet by 110 feet lot that was being sold because of forfeited taxes. Nobody took care of
this lot, so he purchased for $2,500. That has been attached to his property. If he is allowed to
build on that lot, it increases the value of his 50-foot lot. That would not be a buildable lot
though because it is attached to his home. If the 50-foot lot to the east became a buildable lot, he
would be allowed to separate his 50-foot lot and build on it. It is as if he would be penalized for
taking that land ten years ago and improving it and cleaning it up. Ten yeaxs later the rules have
been changed. His real issue is with the west side of his property. His house is situated close to
that property line and it is in the flood plain. The land has to be built up before it can be built on.
That backyard is his open space. He thinks a house built there would be very intrusive. It would
be unfair to allow a house to be built on two 25-foot lots. If the current owner of the property
took the initiative and got it combined, that is exactly what would happen.
Mayor Lund stated that his points would be duly noted.
Ms. Conella Angell, 8016 Ruth Street, stated that her home was built in 1978. Her concern is
that she has two lots side by side and she is taxed on both. She receives two separate ta�c
statements. One lot is 60 feet wide and the other is 15 feet wide. She is not sure if her lots are
non-conforming.
Mr. Richard Boyce, 520 Glencoe, stated that he was not given this information at closing when
he bought his home two years ago. Should he have been gven this information before he bought
his house?
Mr. Ron Lundsten, 581 Ironton, asked why this was not disclosed when he bought his home
seven years ago. If the house is damaged or destroyed, it is considered condemned. The house
should have been condemned the day he bought it.
Councilmember Barnette stated that he thought that was the purpose of the title search.
Mr. Anthony Cox, 4533 Main Street, stated that they purchased the house eight years ago and he
owns a lot and a half. The house was built in 1935 and they have a 60 foot by 128 foot lot. He
said he is not too sure that if something should happen to his house if he would be allowed to
rebuild.
Mr. Michael Curtis, 689 Janesville, stated that his house was built in 1978 on an existing 60-foot
lot. A building permit was issued in 1978. There was a fire in the house in 1981. A permit was
given to rebuild that house and there was more than fifty percent (50%) damage to the house.
Why just now after all this time are they being told they cannot do that any more? This property
is now of no value to someone who wants to buy a home. He is in favor of the ordinance.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5. 2001 PAGE 9
Ms. Stephanie Rounsville, 565 Hugo Street, asked if each of the houses designated for this
overlay district have 25 feet to the reaz and 25 feet in front. She does not think that her house
does. She bought the house eight months ago. This was never disclosed to her at all and a title
search was paid for. That makes that home valueless because of the way the ordinance is
written. Her house is set further back and the gazage is detached from the home and abuts right
up to the property line. She wants to make sure this is adequate and she is covered.
Mr. Jason Curtis, 585 Ironton Street, stated that he bought his house three years ago. The
insurance will pay off the house but not the land. He cannot sell the land and he would have no
place to go. He is in favor of the ordinance.
Ms. Annette Hagen, 440 57`h Place, stated that she bought her home two yeazs ago and it does
not meet the requirements for the footage from the front of the house to the street.
Mr. Tom Leonard, 526 Glencoe, stated that he bought the house in 1974 and had the title search,
but now the City is saying that it is no good. How does that work? When did this law change?
Mayor Lund stated that it was changed in 1955.
Mr. Leonard stated that they were all empty lots back then and he wondered how the City did it?
If the City bought the house back for fair market value, he would say that is a pretty good deal.
Mayor Lund stated that this was sold on a private transaction. The City did not sell him that.
Mr. A1 Stahlberg, 8055 Riverview Terrace, asked if the lot on Fairmont could be disattached?
Could a pazcel be sliced off and a house built there?
Mayor Lund stated that the short answer would be "no." He would like to hear all of the
residents' questions and then refer to City staff for response.
Mr. Jim Klein, 500 Glencoe Street, stated that his property was built on two lots that aze
combined. Why do they not combine for tax purposes too? The other issue is that there were two
separate times when the house was renovated and at neither time were they notified that this
situation existed. This lack of communication should be addressed and modified.
Mayor Lund stated that the staff has been trying to address this. He asked when the properties
were renovated?
Mr. Klein stated that they were renovated in 1982 and 1989.
i
Mr. Roger Avery, 600 Glencoe Street, stated that on his tax statement, it says that his lot is 75
feet by 135 feet. He is in favor of the ordinance.
Mr. Curtis stated that his lot is smaller than his next door neighbor's, but he pays more taxes
because his house is bigger.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 10
NIr. Dell Freitag, 537 Fairmont, asked if this will take effect tonight.
Mayor Lund stated that this is a public hearing, and the next item will be a first reading of the
proposed ordinance.
Mr. Burns stated that the second reading will be during the last Council meeting during March..
Mr. Knaak stated that it would then take effect 60 days after the second reading of the ordinance.
Ms. Freitag stated that it is terrible that they should have to wait three months for this ordinance
in case there is a fire before then. She is in favor of the ordinance.
Mr. John Thomas, 611 Glencoe Street, stated that he does not think that his lot would even be 50
feet wide. How could a builder be allowed to build on that land? His house was built in 1969.
Mr. Avery stated that a fellow by the name of Roger Meyer built the houses in that area. At that
time, he asked for special variances to build on those lots. The people who worked for the City at
that time gave permission.
Mr. Lundsten asked if a doublewide trailer could be put on a foundation on one of those lots.
Ms. Kim Saxe, 4452 Madison Street, stated that she does not want what happened to her family
three years ago to happen to anyone else. Their house burned down and they were unable to
rebuild.
Mr. Todd Rautio, 551 Lafayette, stated that there is a big silver maple in his front yard. If he
knew this was happening, he would have cut that down a long time ago. If this does not pass,
will the City come out and remove the tree?
Mr. Bob Eastman, 641 Glencoe Street, stated that builders from the City built these houses.
Those lots were legal at that time and he is all for this.
Ms. Hagen stated that her home did not meet the criteria for the distance from the street to the
house. If she was to remodel she could probably only build up. She asked is she would be ablt
to rebuild on the existing foundation?
Councilmember Bolkcom asked when the old ordinance was adopted.
Mr. Bolin stated that it was adopted in 1959.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked why the vacant lots were not included.
Mr. Bolin stated that the maps that this was derived from were scanned, and through that
process, the lot size could have been thrown off. In the original search, the lot on Ely Street
showed up as 4,890 square feet. The title states that it is 50 feet by 110 feet and meets the size
requirement. The data is sent from Anoka County twice a year. Sometimes Anoka County is 18
i
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 11
months behind in updating the data sent. The vacant lot on Buffalo Street and Lafayette showed
up as occupied homes during the initial seazch. We have a disclaimer on the map and it is for
informational purposes. There is no such thing as a one hundred percent (100%) completely
accurate map. The final say as to whether or not a property would qualify for inclusion lies in
the records at Anoka County. If a home burned down before a building permit was issued, we
� could double check with Anoka County to get the conect lot size.
Mayor Lund asked if he was alluding to 600 Glencoe Street.
Mr. Bolin stated that they would look at that one. The one they have shows a 50-foot lot. It is
either wrong at Anoka County or in Fridley's records.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that anyone with questions could call City staff or go to Anoka
County.
Mr. Bolin stated that the lot size could be easily found out.
Mr. Knaak stated that the information at closing regarding the title and title policy is not an
affirmative obligation on the part of anybody to disclose municipal ordinances. That is the
responsibility of the buyer. Those kinds of non-conformities do not affect the title. Banks and
the insurers are protected if they have insurance. Their standard policy is if there is a case, the
outstanding balance on the mortgage gets paid of£ Variances were granted under certain
circumstances and hardships may have been found on some of these lots. That does not change
the underlying circuxnstance. The variance was granted but it did not change the ordinance. It
can create a lot size variance overall for that particular parcel and that can probably be built on
again.
Councilmember Billings stated that the reason staff was putting this together is to correct that
situation and make it more viable for people to be able to build in the future.
Mr. Knaak stated that was correct.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that this is why this originally came about. Two homes in the
last couple years were more than 50 percent destroyed by fire. One of them was not allowed to
rebuild because they were on a 50-foot lot, and they moved out of our community.
Mr. Bolin stated that to answer Mr. LaFave's and Mr. Stahlberg's questions regarding two lots
combined or two split apart, this is the reasoning for the January 1, 2001, time frame placed on
the ordinance itself--to not create new lots.
Mr. Burns stated that the ordinance applies to lots created before January 1, 2001.
Mr. Bolin stated that was correct.
Mayor Lund stated that this came about because of the recent street improvements.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 12
Mr. Bolin stated that there were some assessments in the Riverview Heights neighborhood in
1999. A number of people combined their pazcels to avoid getting assessed on numerous
parcels. Staff wanted to include all the individuals with recently combined pazcels.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that if there are two 25-foot lots, this will not apply now.
Mr. Bolin stated that was correct.
�
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she may as well combine them if the ordinance passes '
tonight or not.
Mr. Bolin stated that the question of the non-conforming lot that was not listed on the map could
have been overlooked. Staff will get back to the owner regarding that.
Mr. Hickok stated that the property of Mr. Anthony Cox, 4533 Main Street, is not on the map
because the map only shows the most intense area of Riverview Heights. There are other lots
elsewhere in the City that are not on this map.
Mr. Bolin stated that in response to the question from Mr. Curtis, 689 Janesville, regarding why
permits were given in 1981, it could have been due to variances or other reasons.
Mr. Hickok stated that on a non-conforming lot, permits can be issued for siding, windows, and
decks. Enlarging the structure is difficult. There were typically no permits issued on non-
conforming lots for those situations. There may have been circumstances that we cannot explain.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that someone could build on a non-conforming lot with a
vaziance.
Mr. Hickok stated that even if they were granted a variance for a non-standard lot, that is a size
issue and has an impact on the overall size of the lot. Tonight we are trying to address and
collectively pull all of these lot size issues together.
Mayor Lund stated that if there was a wrong at some point, we are trying to make a right.
Mr. Hickok stated that with respect to the question from Ms. Stephanie Rounsville, 565 Hugo
Street, regarding a 25-foot rear lot and a 25-foot front lot, we can make a determination from our
records. We would be glad to talk to her.
Mr. Bolin stated that with this proposed overlay district, we are really addressing the lot sizes.
We know all these lots are non-conforming in size. With any other residential property across �
the city, there may be some cases where they may be closer than the 25-foot setback and would
need a separate variance. -
Mr. Hickok stated that Mr. Curtis, 585 Ironton, asked if the insurance would only include that
damage done to the structure but not help him out in terms of rebuilding his house. That is
correct.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 13
Ms. Hagen, 440 - 57�' Place, states that her lot does not meet the requirements. In her case, it is
on the larger map of the overall City and her lot does meet the requirements.
Mr. Leonard, 526 Glencoe Street, asked about a structure built in 1974 and wondered how this
worked with a vacant lot. He is not aware of the specifics on the permits on either side of him,
but they aze trying to conect those situations.
Mr. Stahlberg's question has been addressed by Mr. Bolin and Mr. Knaak.
Mr. Klein, 500 Glencoe, asked about two lots. His property was built on two lots as a single lot.
There was a 1982 and 1999 building permit issued. Staff will try to figure that out.
The answer to Ms. Freitag's question about when the minimum dimension went to 7,500 square
feet is December 31, 1955.
Mr. Thomas, 611 Glencoe Street, asked how a builder can build on a piece of property with the
1969 permit in question. That question has been answered, but he can 'talk to Mr. Thomas
directly for clarification if needed.
Mr. Lundsten's question about a double wide built on a foundation is possible as long as the
home is built to the uniform building code standazds.
Ms. Hagen asked if she could rebuild on an extra foundation. Building on a non-conforming lot
without the ordinance represents expanding on a non-conforming lot.
Mr. Franzen, 590 Kimball, stated that in 1992, he applied for a variance to reduce front and side
yard setbacks and total lot coverage and it was granted. The property was two 25-foot lots and
he complied with everything the City told him to do in 1992. This is a good thing the City is
doing.
Ms. Freitag asked if they could check for more information on the foundation of her house.
A question was asked if all these lots were platted and where the information was.
Mr. Bolin stated that they were all platted. The information is at the Anoka County courthouse
or the Municipal Center.
A question was asked about who the representative was for the Riverview Heights area?
Councilmember Barnette stated that it is Councilmember Bolkcom.
A question was asked on why they were not notified of this previously.
A question was asked what would happen if this ordinance did not pass. Should this be up to a
vote for the people of Fridley?
Mayor Lund stated that they would have to wait until the next election.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 14
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that they have been working on this for three yeazs. An article
was in the fall newsletter. There was a program on cable about it. There are over 100 properties
in Riverview Heights with these lot sizes. She is sorry if people do not think she is representing
them, but she is and she is for this. A letter was sent out to residents regarding the February 5
meeting.
Mayor Lund stated that three years ago, many people did not realize the extent of this potential
problem. They have been trying to address it.
Mr. Lundsten stated that he was curious about exactly what happened from when his home was
built in 1943 to when it was condemned in 1955.
Councilmember Wolfe stated that he does not think anyone was against this, they were
concerned about building on lots that were vacant now.
Ms. Nancy Jorgenson, 5730 Polk Street, stated that several people are concerned that if their
home burned down, would they have to build on the existing foundations or meet the current
codes for foundations. If people have to meet certain setbacks, they will have to put in a new
basement. Is there any way the ordinance can take a look at that rather than having them come
forward on a case-by-case basis for a variance? Her concern is about what is going to happen to
the other 25-foot lots that are not going to be built on. If we are going to have 25-foot lots all
over town, no one is going to be taking care of them and they will become dumpsites. What
happens to an individual property if they have 46 feet by 200 feet? What happens if there is a
vacant 25-foot lot next to them? If they picked up that 25-foot lot, they would miss the deadline
of January l, 2001, and could very well be short the minimum footage to complete the building.
Do we know how many homes in Fridley have been built on lots less than 50 feet wide?
Mr. David Nickolausen, 5949 Glencoe, stated that he is in favor of this. He bought his house
over one year ago and if this does not go through, he might as well just put it back on the market
right now.
Mayor Lund asked Mr. Knaak what would happen between the first and final reading if there
was a problem.
Mr. Knaak stated that if this were passed and we were waiting for this to be effective and
somebody's house burned, he is hard pressed to imagine how things would move so quickly as to
make that relevant. Other issues could be handled by allowances by the City with the
understanding that within a short period of time this would be a conforming property. As a
practical matter, it would not matter much. The City could waive the requirement in special
circumstances.
Councilmember Bolkcom thanked everyone for coming.
Mayor Lund stated that the purpose was to allow everyone to speak.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 15
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by
Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 9:20 P.M.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the first reading could be moved before the next public
hearing.
Mayor Lund answered that it could.
NEW BUSINESS :
14. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE RECODIYING FRIDLEY CITY CODE,
CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED "ZOl�TING" BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 205.31,
0-6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 DISTRICT
REGULATIONS (ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT, ZTA #00-04, BY THE CITY
OF FRIDLE� (TABLED FEBRUARY 5, 2001):
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the first reading of the ordinance. Seconded
by Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (CONTINUED):
12. CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7 OF THE FRIDLEY
CITY CHARTER PERTAINING TO TAXATION AND FINANCES:
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember
Bolkcom.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 9:25 P.M.
Mr. Pribyl, Finance Director, stated that the Vice-Chair of the Charter Commission and the City
Attorney were present to speak on this topic.
Mr. Craig Gordon, Vice-Chair of the Fridley City Charter Commission, stated that this ordinance
is the result of the Charter amendment petition that was circulated by a group of residents in the
City of Fridley. It was focused on placing tax limitations and to control the rate of growth upon
local government while protecting the bond rating and not placing any undue hardship on the
City or the HRA. The amendment was voted on in the general election of November 7, 2000,
and adopted. City staff had questions and concerns on that amendment. An ad hoc group
comprised of former Mayor, Nancy Jorgenson, Charter Commission members, City sta.ff and
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 16
members of the amendment initiators was formed. This group met various times to clarify the
language in the amendment. The language was vague and there were concerns there may be
problems in the amendment as it was passed on November 7. There were changes made to the
amendment that clarified the amendment and made it easier for the City staff to operate under.
After that process, the changed amendment went to the Charter Commission. The Charter
Commission discussed it at its meeting on January 29, 2001. It passed with no one opposing it,
and it was recommended that it be presented to the City Council for approval.
Mr. Knaak stated that changing the Charter by ordinance is the legal method by which these �
issues need to be addressed. There is no issue about the overwhelming nature of the vote that
occuned when this was proposed. There was never any discussion about the particulars of the
language. To implement this language, staff carefully reviewed the adopted language and
concerns were raised about possible legal issues. The idea of proposing technical amendments
was raised at that point and the purpose of the ordinance is not to substantively change at any
point what the voters had voted on.
Mr. Knaak said that the first problem area is how this amendment applied to other units of
government. The language could be construed to apply to government units outside the City,
such as schools. Under the current Charter, schools are included if located in the City limits.
The HRA and the county would also be covered by the language. The full faith and credit issue
is a problem area because it raises the question if the City would be allowed to require to back up
its bonding. The result of this would be a significant increase in taxes and liability for the City.
That was not the intent, this was only a technical clarification. The other area had to do with the
issue of fees. Under State law, the City charges fees for services it actually provides and they are
directly related to the cost of the services. Any efforts to suggest changes to the amendment to
the Charter could not attempt substantive change to the voters' language. Former Mayor
Jorgenson called on many Charter member components as well as City staff and Charter
Commission members to examine the new language and suggest any changes useful within these
limits.
Mr. Knaak stated that the proposed ordinance adds additional language that clarifies that the new
Charter will nof affect the general obligations of the City. The other language is stricken or
underlined or italicized. This ordinance is not intended in any way to substantively change, undo
or modify what the voters acted on in adopting the recent amendment. He was tremendously
impressed by all the citizens participating in this.
Councilmember Billings asked if they could hear from someone who was on the initial Charter
Amendment Petition Committee to make sure that this is not inconsistent with their original
thinking.
�
Mr. Eisenzimmer stated that he was on that committee. There were a few items in there he was
not happy with. He is not happy with fees for operating junkyards, annual license fees, fees for '
operating pawn shops, and the regulation of businesses. In the minutes from the meeting on
January 29, he did vote nay on this matter.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 17
Mr. Cazline asked about the fee added regarding pawn shops. Is that still in effect? If the
residents of Melody Manor have a big garage sale every year, is there a fee chazged?
Ms. Lana Freeburg, 301 Rice Creek Terrace, an original Committee member, stated that they
agreed as a group that there were no true substantive changes to this. It was a clarification of
� wording to help the City function the way it should. The group was satisfied that what was
presented was what was decided on.
�
Mr. Quentin Freeburg, 301 Rice Creek Terrace, stated that he was involved with the petition and
part of the committee group. He agrees that there were no substantive changes in proposing
these technical amendments.
Mr. Greg Pettersen, 1601 Innsbruck Drive, stated that he was also involved with the committee.
He said that they were trying to clarify the language in the Charter. They went directly from
trying to clarify the language to what the original intent was. Oftentimes it came down to a
question of whether this was something the group intended to address.
Mr. William Holm, 7424 Melody Drive, stated that he was a member of the committee and a
member of the Charter Commission. The Charter Commission's role on the committee was to
hear the input from the petitioner's group. Their interpretation is what controlled what went on
during the committee's meetings, what was presented to the Charter Commission, and what was
ultimately approved. That group was very cooperative in resolving this. Mr. Knaak developed
the technical language.
Ms. Olson stated that as long as the City was not going to put a fee on her extraordinarily high
gas bill and electric bill she is content with the language.
Ms. Lynne asked if this addressed the Manufactured Home Park Closing Ordinance.
Mr. Knaak stated the ordinance is not imposing any new fees, only clarifying existing language
and fees and preventing a situation from occurring. This prevents these chazges over time to not
reflect the actual service being provided by the City. For example, this applies to landlords,
health inspection fees, and health and safety issues. The City would feel compelled if the
language is not clarified to go to the voters with a list about five or six pages long on a ballot.
This does not create new fees. If the Council agrees with the position stated or not, for the City
to actually eliminate those fees would require a substantive change. That is not what this is
about.
, Mr. Knaak stated that the Manufactured Home Park Closing Ordinance has to do with
discretionary fees and the language that was in the current Charter. This ordinance does take
care of that problem.
Mr. Knaak stated that Mr. Carline's question regarding garage sale fees was addressed by the
committee. A new fee would have to be treated as a new fee and brought to the voters. If a
garage sale fee was suggested, it would have to be brought to the voters. We are dealing with
existing fees.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 18
Mayor Lund stated that the voters would like to avoid the cost of a potential user fee.
Mr. Knaak stated that a super majority was created in the language of the ordinance. It requires
the vote of fifty-one percent (51 %) of alt voters in the election to adopt any change in the fees.
Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Knaak if Mr. Eisenzimmer's comments regarding some �
provisions being removed is not permissable because it is from the Charter Commission meeting.
Council can only accept this or reject this.
Mr. Knaak stated that was conect.
Councilmember Billings stated that small businesses going out of business need clarification
from Mr. Eisenzimmer as to what he was talking about. Probably what he is referring to is new
fees for service or fees that were in excess of what it costs the City to administer the provisions
of the existing ordinances. No new fees could be established that do not already exist, and the
paragraph he was referring to states that the fees must be limited to the actual cost of the service
being provided.
Mr. Knaak stated that was correct.
Mr. Eisenzimmer stated that he was referring to junkyards being stricken off. You should not
impose fees on a certain type of business such as junkyazds and pawn shops.
Councilmember Billings stated that he agrees and is a little confused by the language that is
there. It is unusual for something in the City Charter to spell out the administration of a couple
of types of our licenses. We have no choice but to accept or reject this and this makes sure we
keep the intent of the original language. That paragraph does talk about other regulated
businesses and it certainly is livable.
Mr. Eisenzimmer stated that Mr. Knaak and Ms. Skogen talked about why this was in there. He
just does not understand the whole thing.
Ms. Jorgenson stated that Mr. Eisenzimmer was concerned about these fees. Due to the type of
businesses that they were, with possible contamination clean-up or the investigative nature of the
pawn shops, they were addressed separately. It was the committee that brought these two fees up
for discussion.
Mr. Gordon stated that at the Charter Commission meeting on January 9, 2001, Mr. Eisenzimmer
raised the issue but the other petition circulators did not have problems with this language.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember
Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 10:05 P.M.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 19
Mayor Lund stated that he appreciates the public's comments and apologizes for the lateness of
the hour. He also appreciates the hard work of everyone involved.
Councilmember Barnette stated that he would like to move Item No. 15 before Item No. 13.
Mayor Lund stated that was fine.
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
15. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7 OF THE
FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER PERTAINING TO TAXATION AND FINANCES:
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to approve the first reading. Seconded by
Councilmember Bolkcom.
Councilmember Billings stated that there aze substantive changes being made with this
ordinance. He would prefer to table this item until the next meeting to allow the public to have
exposure to the discussion held at the public hearing.
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table this item until the next Council meeting and to
have it appear on the regular agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNAIVIMOUSLY.
OLD BUSINESS:
13. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FRIDLEY CITY
CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 223 CONCERNING MANUFACTURED HOME
PARKS, REQUIRING OWNERS TO PAY RELOCATION EXPENSES TO
DISPLACED RESIDENTS UPON PARK CLOSINGS (TABLED JANUARY 22,
2001): _
Councilmember Billings stated that State statutes are clear that when there is a closing, the
municipality shall hold a public hearing. This ordinance is not necessary with only two parks in
the City. The ordinance assumes that the park owner is going to be selling the park at windfall
prices. It does not address the possibility that the park owner is losing the park because of
bankruptcy or that in fifteen years these types of homes are not even going to be built anymore.
There are too many uncertainties. The bottom line is that this ordinance could not contemplate
every scenario for a park closing. Staff admits it cannot be done. If there is a park closing, the
determinations are made at that time. The park owners have not come to oppose this because
they do not want to create problems with the residents. He does not think the ordinance is
necessary.
Councilmember Barnette stated that he disagrees. If there are ever any lawsuits, we are on safer
ground having the ordinance in place.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 20
Councilmember Wolfe asked if part of the reason for having this ordinance was because of the
apartments being built.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that it has to do with the fact that there has been other park
closings in other cities. She agrees with Councilmember Barnette. We will not get every detail,
but it is a way of protecting a group of people who need protection.
Councilmember Wolfe asked Mr. Carline if this is the issue he was referring to when he stated
that government should not be involved in these kinds of issues.
Mr. Carline stated that he used to own a mobile home. It took him seven weeks to find a park to
put it in. It did not have wooden siding and it was too big at 1,300 square feet. He sold it after
eleven months and it is something like "buyer beware." When he sold it, he had to move it. It
was very expensive to move.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that this ordinance is not addressing fees, but protecting a group
of people and helping to preserve affordable housing. Fridley is well above the average of other
cities for affordable housing. �
Mr. Carline stated that this is a problem for the mobile home owners and somebody has to
protect the mobile home park owner. Mobile homes are so impossible to move.
Mr. Fernelius stated that the 25 mile radius comes from State law.
Councilmember Wolfe stated that some people may stay there just so they will get paid.
Councilmember Billings stated that they could have a situation where someone saves enough
money to purchase a house and they have a new manufactured home. Rather than finding a
buyer and location, they exercise the option not to move because they cannot find a spot within
25 miles. The pazk owner is obligated to purchase that home. Rather than going through the
hassle, they sit tight until the closing comes along and someone pays them to move. The very
same language that staff is relying on is language in the State statute. He wonders why we don't
wait to deal with this until the situation comes up.
Mr. Knaak stated that there is no requirement that the City provide for any compensation under
any circumstances. If any compensation is to occur, it is going to happen because the City
Council authorizes it. You would want to do this by ordinance because then you would not have
another opportunity until the public hearing. You would be forced to improvise. The argument
is going to be caming from the side of the park owner. Anything that you decide is required is
something coming out of that individual's hide and it is an open invitation to the charge of
arbitrariness or capriciousness. If you do this in advance and follow the rules when the hearing
occurs, you eliminate that argument. This benefits the owners because it establishes what fees
can be charged.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5. 2001 PAGE 21
Mayor Lund stated that he believes that the unique situation of homeowners on rented property
creates a different scenario and he would have to go along with the ordinance. He does have
reservations, however, because of the input from Councilmember Billings.
Mr. Burns asked if they would use the appraised value.
' Mr. Fernelius stated that they would use the appraised value.
• Tracey Tomas, representing Park Plaza stated that she talked to Mr. Fernelius and Ms. Dacy at
the initial meeting regarding park closing ordinances. They are not opposed to this at all. They
talked about modeling it after the State statute. At the previous meeting, it was discussed that
they were going along with it because there is no reason to argue the point because it is already a
State statute. They understand their residents' genuine concern about the unique situation. If the
park was going to close, they would know exactly what to pay. There are no plans to close the
manuiactured home park. The concern is how specific the ordinance has become. Who knows
what the City would want to do with that land many years from now, and the City's hands would
be tied as well. The cap on the compensation is a concern. Who picks up the difference for the
cap? They do not know what the situation would be if the park ever closes. It is unreasonable to
pay to have someone's personal belongings packed up and moved. Ms. Geri Lynne, a Fridley
Terrace resident, has notes that define personal property as expenses for packing, crating,
unpacking, and uncrating of personal property; disconnecting, dismantling, removing,
reassembling, and reinstalling relocated household appliances and other personal property.
Storage of personal property not to exceed 12 months is absolutely unreasonable. The last
section under penalties stating that violation of any provision of this ordinance shall be a
misdemeanor is also a concern. She said she had a letter from Mr. Mark Brunner from MMHA
regarding this matter.
Mayor Lund asked if she had the letter with her.
Ms. Tomas stated that she did not.
Ms. Geri Lynne, 7303 Taylor Street, stated that she is a resident of Fridley Terrace Mobile Home
Park. With respect to expenses of moving personal property, there was a list of what could be
included as personal property contained in the Federal Uniform Relocation Act. If that act
kicked in, this would be defined for the moving details. She received a copy of the draft of the
ordinance late Wednesday. The copy of the draft of the ordinance was not included in the letter
to the residents advising them of tonight's hearing. She is concerned about the personal property
inclusion and she wants to thank Mr. Fernelius for putting it in. The question is if this would
apply to people's homes that have been bought out. She cannot tell by the ordinance if it would.
The City requires an appraiser licensed by the State of Minnesota to do the appraisals. This
would be an expense they would have to cover. In disputes over evaluations over homes that
� would be sold out or bought out by the property purchaser, it says that under Section 223.08.01:
"The appraisal may be provided by the displaced resident, the park owner, or the purchaser. Any
disputes over evaluation shall be resolved through judicial action in Anoka County District
Court." An attorney she talked to today stated that although you can go into District Court
without an attorney, he highly advised that you do have an attorney. That would probably cost
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 22
over $400. The purchaser shall pay such compensation into an escrow account established by
the park owner for distribution upon transfer of title to the manufactured home. If the park was
closed and she wanted to tender title to her home, when would she get her check? The latest
figures from Anoka County for Fridley Tenace for the cap would come somewhere in the
neighborhood of $4,300 for the home owner if they were displaced and that does not cover what
her home is worth. That would not cover a lot of people. The differential may be passed on to ,
the taxpayers. Fridley homeowners can call her or the office for a copy of the draft ordinance.
She appreciates the fine work of the City. Mr. Fernelius has done a very good job of pulling this
together and she appreciates all the hazd work done on this ordinance. '
Mr. Fernelius stated that they are trying to avoid a situation where a future Council is faced with
relocation compensation and the question of who pays for the rest of the portion. He would
recommend adopting the cap. Burnsville and Apple Valley have the caps. Bloomington and
Roseville do not. Under the issue of personal property, it is fairly clear that the items included in
the revised ordinance have not provided the level of specificity Ms. Lynne has. We have tried to
address that issue fairly clearly. The deadline for the mailing of the draft was made clear to Ms.
Lynne. As soon as the mailing was done, she was made a copy of it. We tried to mail the letter
in a timely fashion. This is not a new issue for all the residents affected by it. We have not
received many comments from people affected by this. Whether or not people will be
compensated for the value of their unit, they would not receive any kind of compensation for
moving personal property. They receive money to move their personal property or make the
decision to sell their home. It is an either or proposition. The ordinance does not state that the
displaced owner has to pay for that appraisal. It could be provided for by any one of the private
parties. That is something that could be negotiated. With regard to the tendering of the title, the
language is somewhat confusing. If you want to be bought out for the value of your unit, you
will have to wait until sixty days prior to the closing of the park. The presumption is that the
closing of the park will be tied to the closing on the sale of the land. That is when the money
will become available. Compensation paid prior to that time will make that process more
difficult.
Councilmember Wolfe asked if it would be better to specify that the owner of the home itself
gets the appraisal and pays for it, or the owner of the property. ---
Mr. Fernelius sta.ted that they could include any language in there. They were trying to make
this as broad as possible and to allow as much flexibility as possible. Any one of those parties
can provide the appraisal.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the first reading of the ordinance. Seconded
by Councilmember Bolkcom.
,
Councilmember Billings offered amendments to Section 223.08. He stated that his proposed
language would indicate that it would be at the fair market value arrived at by an appraiser, or if '
an appraisal does not exist, at the current assessed value. If the park owner, purchaser, or the
displaced resident, does not like the value put on the property by the assessed value of Anoka
County, they can pay for an appraiser and that appraisal will determine the value.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 23
MOTION by Councilmember Billings to insert the following into 223.08, titled "Limitation of
Location Costs and Compensation:" "The total amount of compensation paid to displaced
owners of manufactured homes shall not exceed the greater of twenty percent (20%) of the
County's Assessor's estimated mazket value of the manufactured home park as determined by the
County Assessor for the year in which the park is scheduled to close or twenty percent (20%) of
the purchase price of the park." Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Councilmember Billings to explain his reasoning.
Councilmember Billings stated that there has been much discussion that one of the benefits to the
park owners is that this ordinance would spell out some guidelines for them so they would know
what types of costs they would incur. Placing the twenty percent (20%) figure in the ordinance
helps park owners determine what kind of costs they would potentially face. This particulaz
scenario provides that this compensation will be paid if this park owner goes out of business
because they cannot afford to be in business any longer and they do not have the financial
wherewithal to pay these fees. It is a misdemeanor and they will be thrown in jail. We do not
know that someone is going to make a windfall on a sale ten, fifteen, or twenty years in the
future.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Knaak if that was true.
Mr. Knaak stated that a misdemeanor is a crime punishable by 90 days in jail. This ordinance
does create the crime for non-compliance.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that if the non-compliance was because there was no money
there, would it still be considered the same? �
Mr. Knaak stated that this would be a behavioral incident, but any violation of the ordinance
would be a crime. How does Councilmember Billing's amendment correspond to the
amendment just adopted by the Council providing for a separate appraisal? Is this creating a
circumstance in which the language just adopted is rather meaningless? The appraisal does not
matter if there is an assessment that is far less. -
Councilmember Billings stated that he is using assessed values of two different things. He is
using the assessed value of the mobile home itself. The language proposed in the amendment is
the assessed market value of the home park as determined by the County Assessor. Could we get
into a situation where the closing costs exceed twenty percent (20%) of the purchase price and of
the estimated market value of the mobile home park?
Mr. Knaak stated that would explain the language.
Councilmember Barnette stated that he understands Councilmember Billing's point but Mayor
Lund stated that there will be value to that piece of land no matter what happens to the pazk.
Whether it would be enough to pay the assessed value off is the question.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 24
Mr. Knaak stated that other cities have tried to address that issue by putting those caps on. In
terms of bankruptcy there is a question of whether the homeowner would be able to stand before
the bankruptcy trustee and have a claim. It would have to be predicated on the contractual
relationship and require that payment be made, or on a statutory basis. In this instance it would
be the ordinance. Absent that, there is the possibility that the City could not award enough. The
jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court would be absolute.
Mayor Lund asked if he had any thoughts on who makes up the differential.
Councilmember Billings stated that pursuant to State statute, the City Council has the authority
to have additional compensation paid to displaced persons by the City or by others.
Mayor Lund stated that would be true regazdless of whether we have this ordinance or not.
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that she is not ready to agree to the amendment without
understanding the ramifications.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND AND COUNCILMEMBERS BARNETTE,
WOLFE, AND BILLINGS VOTING AYE, COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING
NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Lund asked for a vote on the main motion.
Mr. Fernelius stated that the additional language to be added on the cap would be under a new
section.
Councilmember Billings stated it is put under Section 223.08 but if staff would like to make it a
new item and renumber 9 and 10 it would be appropriate.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND AND COUNCILMEMBERS BOLKCOM,
BARNETTE COUNCILMEMBERS WOLFE AND BILLINGS VOTING NAY, MAYOR
LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED.
14. INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS:
Councilmember Bolkcom stated that the crowd at the Home and Remodeling Fair last weekend
was not as big as last year, probably due to the weather. Staff spent a lot of time planning this
and it is much appreciated.
Mayor Lund stated that the Fridley Lion's Club Spring Pancake Breakfast tickets are available
now. It will be held on Sunday, March 18 at the Fridley Community Center from 7:00 a.m. to
12:00 p.m.
Councilmember Wolfe stated that he would like to congratulate Carrie Varichek, a gymnast from
Fridley High School, who qualified for the State tournament.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 5, 2001 PAGE 25
ADJOURN:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Councilmember
Wolfe.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
"� MARCH 5, 2001, CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Signe L. Johnson Scott J. Lund
Recording Secretary Mayor
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
CfTY OF
FRIDLEY
Date: 3/ 16/01 ? '
Pja.
To: William Burns, City Manager��t��`
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Paul Bolin, Planner
RE: Second Reading of an Ordinance Creating the O-6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS
CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 REGULATIONS
M-01-31
INTRODUCTION
City planning staff is proposing the creation of the "O-6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS
CREATED PRIOR TO 1955 OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS". This overlay
district would apply to all residential lots created in the City of Fridley prior to
December 29, 1955. The overlay district is a melding of the language currently
found in the City's R-1 and Hyde Park zoning requirements. Creation of the O-6
District will remove the "non-conforming" status from a number of existing homes,
leading to reinvestment in the City's existing housing stock.
At the February 5, 2001, City Council meeting, the public hearing on this item was
continued until March 5, 2001, in order to better determine the number of Riverview
Heights properties affected by this ordinance.
At the March 5, 2001, City Council meeting, the public hearing was concluded and
the first reading for the creation of the O-6 Overlay District was held.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council hold the second reading for the creation
of the overlay district, titled, "O-6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO 1955
REGULATIONS".
1
Ordinance No. Page 1
ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE RECODIFING FRIDLEY CITY CODE, CHAPTER 205, ENTITLED
"ZO1vING" BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 205.31, 0-6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED
PRIOR TO 1955 DISTRICT REGULATIONS
The Fridley City Council does hereby ordain that:
Section 1. Chapter 205.06 be amended to hereby include Overlav District 0-6, Pre-1955 Lots; and
that
Section 2. Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code be hereby amended to create a new district, Section
205.31, O-6 Residential Lots Created Prior to December 29, 1955 District Regulations
205.31. 0-6 RESIDENTIAL LOTS CREATED PRIOR TO DECEMBER 29, 1955
DISTRICT REGULATIONS
l. TTTLE
This Secrion shall be referred to as the "Pre-1955 Lots" in short form.
2. PURPOSE
The purpose of this special zoning district is to:
A. Change the present "legal, nonconforming use" status of the residential dwellings located in this
district on lots over 5,000 square feet in size to a"confornvng use" status.
B. Re-establish and maintain the residential character of Fridley's neighborhoods.
C. Protect the property rights of a11 present landowners as much as possible, while promoting
reinvestment and infill development in Fridley neighborhoods.
D. Establish a zoning mechanism for the City that will encourage residential investiment and
development on those lots created and recorded at Anoka County prior to December 29,
1955.
3. DISTRICT BOUNDARIES
The extent of this zoning overlay district shall only be comprised of those residentially zoned lots split,
platted, or otherwise created and recorded at Anoka County prior to December 29, 1955. The O-6
district includes lots meeting all criteria set forth in this chapter, located in the following Plats created and
recorded prior to December 29, 1955: Adams Street Addition; Auditor's Subdivisions #22, #23, #25,
#39, #59, #77, #78, #79, #88, #89, #92, #94, #94 Sublot 10, #108, #129, #153, & #155; Berlin
Addition; Brookview Addition; Brookview 2"d Addition; Camp Howard and Hush's lst Addition to
Fridley Park; Carlson's Summit Manor North Addirion; Carlson's Summit Manor South Addition;
Central Avenue Addirion; Central View Manor; Christie Addition; City View; Clover Leaf Addition;
Clover Leaf 2"d Addition; Dennis Addition; Donnay's Lakeview Manor; Elwell's Riverside Heights;
2
Elwell's Riverside Heights Plat 2; Florence Pazk Addition to Fridley; Fridley Pazk; Hamilton's Addition
to Mechanicsville; Hayes River Lots; Hillcrest Addition; Horizon Heights; Irvington Addition to Fridley
Park; Lowell Addition to Fridley Park; Lucia Lane Addition; Lund Addition; Meloland Gardens;
Moore Lake Addition; Moore Lake Highlands & Additions 1-4; Moore Lake Hills; Moore Lake Park
Addition; Moore Lake Park �d Addition; Murdix Park; Niemann Addition; Norwood Addition to
Fridley Park; Oak Creek Addition; Oak Creek Addirion Plat 2; Oak Grove Addirion to Fridley Pazk;
Oakhill Addition; Onaway; Osborne Manor, Ostmans ls` Addition; Ostmans �'d Addition; Parkview
Manor; Plymouth; Rearrangement of Blocks 13, 14, 15 Plymouth; Rearrangement of Lots 1,2,3, Blk 1
and Lots 1,2,3, Blk 4 Rice Creek Terrace Plat 2; Rees Addirion to Fridley Park; Revised Auditors
Subdivisions # 10, #23, #77, # 103; Rice Creek Terrace Plats 1-4; Riverview Heights; Sandhurst
Addition; Second Revised Auditors Subdivision #21; Scherer Addition; Shaffer's Subdivsion #1;
Shorewood; Springbrook Park; Spring Lake Park Lakeside; Spring Valley; Subdivsion of Lot 10,
Auditors Subdivision #94; Sylvan Hills; Sylvan Hills Plat 2& 3; Vineland Addition to Fridley Park; and
any unplatted lots created, prior to December 29, 1955, as recorded at Anoka Counry. Any lot
combinations or divisions of Pazcel Idenrification Numbers done on the after January 1, 2001 would
make the property ineligible for inclusion in this overlay district.
4. USES PERMITTED
A. Principal Uses.
The following are principal uses in the O-6 District:
One-family dwellings.
B. Accessory Uses.
(1) Only one (1) accessory building in excess of 240 square feet is allowed per site. One (1)
additional accessory building is allowed provided it does not exceed 240 square feet.
(2) Any accessory building in excess of the above requirements (square footage or number of
buildings) requires a Special Use Permit.
(3) All accessory buildings must be permanently attached to a foundation or held in place with
approved tie-downs and may not be used for home occupations.
(4) All garages whether attached to, tucked under or detached from the main dwelling are
considered to be an accessory building.
The following are accessory uses in the O-6 District:
(a) A private garage is the first accessory building. It shall not exceed 100% of the fust
floor area of the dwelling unit or a maximum of 1,000 square fee�
(b) Privately owned recrearional facilities which are for the enjoyment and convenience of
the residents of the principal use and their guests.
(c) Home occupations.
�
(d) The rental of rooms for occupancy to not more than two (2) persons per dwelling unit
C. Existing Uses.
Existing one (1) family dwellings that do not conform to the conditions of this Chapter will be
allowed to continue as a pernutted use. In the event that the main structure is either damaged or �
destroyed, the existing use will be allowed to rebuild to the setbacks of the existing building or
to the allowed setbacks of the distric� Alterations and additions will be allowed when they -
improve the structure, provided they meet the required setbacks as stated in this Chapter.
D. Uses Excluded.
The following are excluded uses in the O-6 District:
(1) Radio or television antennas exceeding a height of twenty (20) feet above the dwelling roof.
(2) Any use not specifically pemutted in the preceding paragraphs of this Section.
5. LOT REQUIREMENTS AND SETBACKS
A. Lot Area.
A lot area of not less than 5,000 square feet is required.
B. Lot Width.
The width of a lot shall not be less than fifty (50) feet at the required setback.
C. Lot Coverage:
Not more than thirty-five percent (35%) of the area of a lot shall be covered by buildings.
D. Setbacks:
(1) Front Yard:
A front yard with a depth of not less than twenty-five (25) feet is required.
(2) Side Yazd:
Two (2) side yards are required, each with a width of not less than ten (10) feet, except as '
follows:
(a) Where a house is built without an attached garage, a minunum side yard requirement
shall be ten (10) feet on one side, and thirteen (13) feet on the other side, so that there
is access to the rear yard for a detached garage and off-street parking area.
(b) Where a house is built with an attached garage, the side yard adjouung the attached
garage or accessory building may be reduced to not less than five (5) feet, provided the
I.l
_�
height of the garage or accessory building on that side is not more than fourteen (14)
feet.
(3) Corner Lots:
(a) The side yazd width on a street side of a comer lot shall be not less than seventeen and
one-half (17.5) feet.
(b) Any attached or unattached accessory building that opens on the side street, shall be at
least twenty-five (25) feet from the property line on a side street.
(4) Rear Yard:
(a) A reaz yard with a depth of not less than twenty-five (25) feet pernutted for living area,
however, setback may be reduced to 15' for an attached garage located in rear of lot.
(b) Detached accessory buildings may be built not less than three (3) feet from any lot line
in the rear yard not adjacent to a street.
6. BUILDING REQUIREMENTS
A. Height.
No building shall hereafter be erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, enlarged or moved,
so as to exceed the building height limit of thirty (30) feet.
B. Minimum Floor Area.
A one-family dwelling unit shall have a miniinum fust floor area of 768 square feet of living
space.
C. Basement.
All one family dwellings constructed on vacant lots, as of January 1, 1983 shall have a basement
except if located in a flood plain area.
7. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS:
A. Parking Requirements.
(1) At least two (2) off-street parking stalls shall be provided for each dwelling uni�
(2) No parking stall shall be located in any portion of the front yard, except on a driveway or
hardsurfaced parking space, approved by the City, and set back a minimtun of three (3)
feet from the side property line, except as agreed to in writing by adjacent property owners
and filed with the City.
(3) A garage shall satisfy the off-street parking stall requirement.
(4) All driveways and parking stalls shall be surfaced with blacktop, concrete or other hard
surface material approved by the City.
5
B. Garage Requirements
All lots on which a new home is consi�ucted, as of April l, 2001, shall have at minimum a single
car garage.
C. Exterior Storage.
(1) Nothing shall be stored in the required front yazd.
(2) All materials shall be kept in a building or shall be fully screened, so as not to be visible from
any public right-of-way except for stacked firewood, boats and trailers placed in the side
yard.
D. Refuse.
All waste materials, refuse or garbage shall be contained in closed containers as required under
the Chapter entitled "Waste Disposal" of the Fridley City Code.
E. Drainage And Grade Requirements.
A finished ground grade shall be established such that natural drainage away from all buildings is
provided. The following minimum criteria shall apply:
(1) The minimum elevation of finished grade shall not be less than one fourth (1 /4) inch rise per
horizontal foot of setback measured from curb grade.
(2) The City may specify a minimum finished ground grade for any structures in order to allow
proper drainage and connection to City utilities.
F. Landscaping.
The following shall be minimum criteria for landscaping:
(1) Sodding and landscaping shall extend across the entire front yard and side yards including
the boulevard.
(2) All other open areas of any site, except for areas used for parking, driveways or storage,
shall be sodded, seeded or have vegetarive cover.
(3) All uses shall provide water facilities to yard areas for maintenance of landscaping.
(4) It shall be the ownei's responsibility to see that all required landscaping is maintained in an
attractive, well kept condirion.
(5) All vacant lots, tracts or parcels shall be properly maintained in an orderly manner free of
litter and junk.
G. Maintenance.
��
It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to ensure that:
(1) Every exterior wall, foundation and roof of any building or structure shall be reasonably
watertight, weather right and rodent proof and shall be kept in a good state of maintenance
and repair. Exterior walls shall be maintained free from extensive dilapidation due to
cracks, tears or breaks of deteriorated plaster, stucco, brick, wood or other material that
gives evidence of long neglect.
(2) The protective surface on exterior walls of a building shall be maintained in good repair and
provide a sufficient covering and protecrion of the structural surface against its deteriorarion.
Without limiting the generality of this Section, a protective surface of a building shall be
deemed to be out of repair if:
(a) More than twenty-five percent (25%) of the area of any plane or wall on which the
protecrive surface is paint is blistered, cracked, flaked, scaled or chalked away, or
(b) More than twenty-five percent (25%) of the pointing of any brick or stone wall is loose
or has fallen out.
(3) Every yard and all structures, walls, fences, walks, steps, driveways, landscaping and other
exterior developments shall be maintained in an attractive, well kept condirion.
(4) The boulevard area of a premises shall be properly maintained, groomed and cared for by
the abutting property owner.
H. Essential Services.
(1) Connection is required on each lot served by City sanitary sewer.
(2) Connection is required on each lot served by a Ciry water line.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 26`�
DAY OF MARCH, 2001.
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK
Public Hearing:
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Publication:
March 5, 2001
March 5, 2001
March 26, 2001
7
SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR
` AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
CfiY OF
FRIDLEY
Date: 3/16/01
To: Wiliiam Burns, City Manager ���
.
From: Scott Hickok, Acting Community Development Director
Paul Bolin, Planner
RE: Second reading for a rezoning of the "Gateway East" property
M-01-32
INTRODUCTION
Gateway East Redevelopment, LLC, is seeking to rezone property, generally
located at 57"' Avenue & University Avenue, to S-2, Redevelopment District in o�der
to accommodate the development of 28 finro bedroom townhome units.
The property referred to as "Gateway East" is comprised of properties formerly
used as a pawn shop, an automotive repair shop, a duplex, & two vacant lots.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At the February 7, 2001, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held
on the rezoning of the Gateway East property. After review of the proposed project,
a motion was__made to recommend approval of the rezoning. The motion carried
unanimously.
At the March 5, City Council meeting, the first reading of the ordinance for the
rezoning of the Gateway East property was held.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that the City Council hold the second reading of the
ordinance for the rezoning of the Gateway East property, from a mix of R-2 & C-2, to
S-2 Redevelopment District.
C•�
�•�
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA,
BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS
THE CITY COUNICL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Appendix D of the Ciry Code of Fridley is hereby amended as hereinafter
indicated.
Section 2. The tract or area within the County of Anoka and the City of Fridley and
described as:
NA„
Lots 6, 7, and the south 15 feet, front and rear of lot 8, block 4, Bennett-Palmer
Addition, Anoka Counry, Minnesota.
Lot 8, Block 4, except the south 15 feet, front and rear thereof; and all of Lot 9,
Block 4, Bennett-Palmer Addition Anoka County, Minnesota.
„B„
Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, City View, Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota.
Lot 3, Block 3, City View Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota.
..C„
Lots 4,5, and 6, Block 3, City View Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota.
«p„
Lots 7 and 8, Block 3, City View Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota.
�,E„
Lots 5, 6, and 7, Block 6, City View Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota.
��F„ - -_
All vacated right-of-ways adjoining A- E.
Is hereby designated to be in the S-2 Redevelopment District.
Section 3. That the Zoning Administrator is directed to change the official zoning map to
show said tracts or areas to be rezoned from C-2, General Business 8� R-2, Two
Family Units to S-2, Redevelopment District.
E
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 26TH
DAY OF MARCH, 2001.
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN, CITY CLERK
Public Hearing:
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Published:
February 26, 2001
March 5, 2001
March 26, 2001
SCOTT J. LUND, MAYOR
10
�
a
CITY OF
FRIDLEY
DATE:
TO:
FROM
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
March 16, 2001 , �y
�y v
William W. Burns, City Manager �' f
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator
RE: Final Plat, PS-00-03, David Lopez M-01-12
INTRODUCTION
On January 17, 2001, the Planning Commission considered plat request PS-00-03, by
David Lopez. Mr. Lopez intends to subdivide the property located at 35 62°d Way. Staff
and the Planning Commission recommend approval of PS-00-03, with seven stipulations.
At the February 5, 2001, City Council meeting, approval of the preliminary plat was
approved.
Stipulations on the preliminary plat approval included a stipulation requiring the
dilapidated garage on the proposed Lot #1 be removed prior to the petitioner applying for
final plat approval. The garage has been demolished and that stipulation has been
removed from the final plat approval.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Fridley requires that lots in the R-1 district be a minimum of 75' in width with a
minimum total lot area of 9,000 square feet. The proposed Lot # 1 will be 103' in width
and 13,360 square feet in size after the replat. The proposed Lot #2, which contains an
existing home, will be 77' in width and 9,653 square feet in size after the property is
divided.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of PS-00-03, with the seven
stipulations listed below.
1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
2. Petitioner shall construct a hard surface drive & code required double car garage on
proposed Lot 2, by November 1, 2001. Furthermore, petitioner shall submit a
performance bond to the City of Fridley in the amount of $25, 000 to ensure
construction of drive & garage.
3. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the
issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding
properties.
4. During construction on proposed Lot 1, silt fencing shall be used where applicable.
11
S. Petitioner to pay $I,S00 park dedication fee prior to issuance of building permit for
proposed Lot 1.
6. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees.
7. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees
required to be removed for the new home shall be marked and approved by City staff
prior to issuance of building permits
12
RESOLOTION NO. -2001
RESOLUTION APPROVING A PLAT, P.S. #00-03(L&L BIIILDERS ADDITION), BY
L&L BUILDERS TO REPLAT PROPERTY FOR THE PiTRPOSF OF CREATING LOTS TO
ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME, GENERALLY LOCATED AT
• 3 5 6 2'd WAY
� WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 17,
2001, and recommended approval of said plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the preliminary plat for L&L
BUILDERS ADDITION at their February 5, 2001, meeting with stipulations
attached as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, a copy of the plat L&L BUILDERS ADDITION has been attached as
Exhibit B.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council approves the
Final Plat for L&L BUILDERS ADDITION and directs the petitioner to
record plat at Anoka County within six months of this approval or such
approval shall be null and void.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH13 CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
26th DAY OF MARCH, 2001.
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
y
SCOTT LUND - MAYOR
13
Page 2- Resolution -2001 - L&L BUILDERS ADDITION
EXHIBIT A
9. Petitioner sha/l obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
2, Petitioner shal! construct a hard surface drive & code required double car garage on
proposed Lot 2, by November 1, 2001. Furthermore, petitioner shall submit a
performance bond to the City of Fridley in the amount of $25, 000 to ensure
construction of drive & garage.
3. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the
issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding
properties.
4. During construction on proposed Lot 1, silt fencing shall be used where applicable.
5. Petitioner to pay $9, 500 park dedication fee prior to issuance of building permit for
proposed Lot 1.
6. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees.
7. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. AI! trees
required to be removed for the new home shall be marked and approved by City
staff prior to issuance of building permits.
!�
City of Fridley Land Use Application
PS-00-03 January 17, 2001
GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
David Lopez
512 5`h Street NE
St. Cloud, NIN 56304
Requested Action:
Replat of property to create two lots for
single family home development
Existing Zoning:
R-1 Single Family Residential
Location:
35 62"d Way NE.
Size:
23,013 square feet .52 acres
Existing Land Use:
Home on W'h, E'/z Vacant.
Swrounding Land Use & Zoning:
I�t: Single Family, R-1
E: Railroad, M-1
S: Single Family, R-1
W: Single Family, R-1
Comprehensive Plan Conformance:
Use of property is consistent with Plan.
Zoning Ordinance Conformance:
Single family homes are peimitted in this
wning dis�ict, with a minimum lot size of
9,000 square feet.
Zoning History:
• 1886 — Lot is platted
1950 — Home is built
• 1958 & 1959 — Home additions
Legal Description of Property:
E. 30' of Lot 18; Lots 19-21, Blk 18, Fridley Park
Council Action / 60 Day Action:
February 5, 2001 / February 12, 2001
Public Utilities:
Located near properly.
15
Transportation:
Properties are accessed via 62"d Way.
Physical Characteristics:
Typical suburban landscaping.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Dave Lopez, petitioner, is seeking to replat the
property located at 35 62"d Way into two single
family lots.
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS
Ciry Staff recommends approval of this plat
request, with stipulations.
• Lots exceed minimum size requirements.
• Provides additional homeownership
opportunities for Fridley residents.
(view of property from south)
Staff Report Prepared by: Paul Bolin
PS #00-03
Analvsis
Dave Lopez, petitioner, is seeking to replat the property located at 35 62"d Way into two single fa�nily
lots.
Fridley requires that lots in the R-1 district be a minimum of 75' in width with a minimum total lot area of
9,000 square feet. The proposed Lot # 1 will be 103' in width and 13,360 square feet in size after the
replat. The proposed Lot #2, will be 77' in width and 9,653 square feet in size after the property is
divided.
The proposed Lot 1 contains a dilapidated garage that will need to be removed from the site prior to
final plat approval. City code does not permit accessory buildings on any lot prior to the time of the
issuance of the building pernut for the construction of the principal building. The garage is also open to
trespass in violation of State statutes and all openings must be immediately boarded up to prevent
trespass unril the petitioner removes the garage.
The proposed Lot 2, which contains the existing home, does not provide for off street pazking or a
double garage as required by City Code. City code states that a"minimum of two off-street parking
stalls shall be provided for each dwelling unit". Code fiuther states "all lots having a minimum lot area
of 9,000 square feet or resulting from a lot split shall have a double garage". This means that the City
must ensure that a hard surfaced drive and a two car garage be constructed on the proposed Lot 2 and
is requiring a$25,000 performance bond. The "snowbird" parking ordinance, which prohibits
overnight parking on City streets between November 1& May 1, makes it imperative that the drive and
garage be constructed by November 1, 2001.
(Photos: Left, View from South; Right, View from East.)
Staff Recommendation
City Staff recommends approval of this plat request, with stipulations.
• Lots exceed minimum size requirements.
• Does provide additional homeownership opportunities for Fridley residents.
16
StiAulations
City Staff recommend that the following stipulations be placed upon approval of this request.
1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
2. Petitioner shall remove existing garage from proposed Lot 1 prior to applying to the City for
final plat approval.
3. Petitioner shall construct a hard surface drive & code required double car garage on
proposed Lot 2, by November 1, 2001. Furthermore, petitioner shall submit a performance
bond to the City of Fridley in the amount of $25, 000 to ensure construction of drive &
garage. •
4. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance
of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties.
5. During construction on proposed Lot 1, silt fencing shall be used where applicable.
6. Petitioner to pay $1,500 park dedication fee prior to issuance of building permit for proposed
Lot 1.
7. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees.
8. The petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the extent possible. All trees required
to be removed for the new home shall be marked and approved by City staff prior to
issuance of building permits.
17
, . r- ,
.
�
QTY OF
FRIDLEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
William W. Burns, City Manager �,`,� (�
Jon ��aas, Public Works Director
March 26, 2001
SUBJECT: Resolution Ordering Final Plans for Project No. ST. 2001 - 1
PWO1-028
The attached resolution officially orders the creation of final plans and specifications for the
Moore Lake Hills Neighborhood Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2001 - 1.
This resolution would normally be brought to the Council immediately following the public
hearing on the proposed improvement. The public hearing for this project was held on
November 20, 2000. This resolution was delayed at that time due to the passage of the
Charter Amendment and the uncertainty of its effects on the special assessment process.
Recommend the City Council adopt the attached resolution ordering the fmal plans and
specifications for the Moore Lake Hills Neighborhood Street Improvement Project No. ST.
2001 - l.
JHH:cz
Attachment
1 ��
,
�
0
RESOLUTION NO. - 2001
RESOLUTION ORDERING FINAL PLANS AND ESTIMP,TES OF COSTS
THEREOF: STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2001 - 1
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 48 - 2000 ordered the preliminary plans,
• specifications and estimates of the costs thereof for the improvements
in this project, and
3
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 101 - 2000 received the preliminary
engineering report and called for a public hearing on the matter of
the construction of certain improvements for this project, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 20, 2000 reqarding this
project, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined a need to reconstruct the
streets to maintain them in a safe condition and at a reasonable cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of
Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the following improvements proposed by Council Resolution
No. 48 - 2000 are hereby ordered to be effected and completed as
soon as reasonably possible, to-wit:
Street improvements including grading, stabilized base, hot-mix
bituminous mat, concrete curb and gutter, necessary repairs to
the storm water and sanitary sewer services, landscaping, and
other facilities.
2. That the following work be incorporated in the 2001 street
improvement project as ST. 2001 - 1.
3. That the work to be performed under this project may be performed
under one or more contracts as may be deemed advisable upon
receipt of bids.
4. The Public Works Director, Jon H. Haukaas, is hereby designated
as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and
' specifications and estimates of costs thereof for the making of
such improvements.
.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
26TH DAY OF MP.RCH 2O01.
SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR
ATTEST:
•�
�
�
C7iY OF
FRIDLEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
susJECT:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
William W. Burns, City Manager ��
� �
Jon H. F�ai�kaas, Public Works Director
March 26, 2001
Recarpeting Municipal Center Project No. 339
2001 General Capital Improvement Budget
PWO 1-026
The 2001 General Capital Improvement budget approved by the City Council identified
$140,000 to recarpet the Municipal Center.
The specifications and plans have been prepared and we are now ready to advertise for
bids. The bid opening will be Thursday, May 17, 2001.
This project is necessary to update the existing carpet throughout the Municipal Center.
Many carpeted areas are worn and carpet seams have come apart. Also, many areas have
permanent discoloration from spills and constant usage.
Recommend the Ciry Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing staff to advertise
for bids for Recarpeting Municipal Center Project No. 339.
BN/JHH:cz
Attachment
ZO
0
0
RESOLUTION NO. - 2001
A RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT, APPROVAL OF
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: RECARPETING MUNICIPAL
CENTER PROJECT NO. 3;i9
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fridley has identified funds in the 5-year Capital
Improvement Budget to recarpet the Municipal Center, and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Director has submitted specifications and plans needed for a public
bid.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Anoka County,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. That the remodeling project to recarpet the Municipal Center shall herefore designators:
RECARPET MUNICIPAL CENTER PROJECT NO. 339
2. The plans and specifications prepared by the Public Works Department for recarpeting the
Municipal Center and each of them, pursuant to the Council action heretofore, are hereby
approved and shall be filed with the City Clerk.
3. The work to be performed under Recarpet Municipal Center Project No. 339 be performed
under one contract.
The Public Works Director shall accordingly prepare and cause to be inserted in the official
newspaper advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved
plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for two (2) weeks (at least 10 days),
and shall specify the work to be done and will state that bids will be opened at 11:00 a.m. on
Thursday, May 17, 2001, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, and that no bids will be
considered unless sealed and filed with the Public Works Director and accompanied by a cash
deposit, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City of Fridley for five percent (5%) of the
amount of such bid. That the advertisement for bids for RECARPET MUNCIPAL CENTER
PROJECT NO. 339 shall be substantially standard in form.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 26TH
DAY OF MARCH, 2001.
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR
21
5 YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
BUDGET 2001
City of Fridley As Of 5/10/00
State of Minnesota
General Capital Improvements
2000
Beginning Balance
Revenues
Funds Available
p,�jects
Ending Balance
Beginning Balance
Revenues
Funds Availab�e
P�'ects
Endtng Balance
interest Income �
Total Revenues
Redesign Finance Work Area (MIS)
Reconstruct Front Reception & Work Area
" C�ass A Fire Dept Pumper Truck (2000)
(forwarded from 1999)
•• Voting Tabulation Equipment
•' Upgrade Mini Center Security System
• Improvements to Muni Center Plaza Area
Total Projects
2001
Interest Income
Total Revenues
" Recarpet Muni Center Upper & Lower Levels
• Remodel Police Locker Rooms
• Repair Concrete Sidewalk/Ped Bridge Deck
* Repair & Repaint Interior 8� Exterior of Muni Garage
• Replace Muni Center Plaza Area Fountain
' Install (3) Light Poles/Fixtures-Muni Center Ramp .
Total Projects
' New Project or Equipment
" Relocated Project or E�jp'ent
LL
$ 1,738,152
86•908
$86,908
1,825,060
5,000
14,500
320,000
65,000
12,000
25,000
$441,500
$ 1,383,560
$ 1,383,560
69.178
$69,178
1,452,738
140,000 ,
14,000
10,000
25,000
5,000
10,000
$204,000
$ 1,248,738
�
�
. i
City of Fridley
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager ����
�� �
FROM: Jon �i!��aukaas, Public Works Director
Bob Nordahl, Operations Analyst
DATE: March 22, 2001
SUBJECT: Recarpeting Municipal Center Project No. 339
PWO1-029
The specifications for recarpeting the Municipal Center include the Milliken Carpet Manufacturer
or approved equivalent. This is one of the largest manufacturers in the country and can be bid
by most carpet installation companies. We specified 36 in. x 36 in. carpet tiles with the 24 oz
tufted, textural loop pile sryle. The tiles come in many colors and designs. Once the bids have
been received and a contractor is determined, the contractor will supply the City with carpet
samples to determine the color and pattern.
Many commercial and business offices have installed carpet tiles versus the standard broadloom
method (rolls). The tiles can be installed without as much disruption to the normal business
operation and allowing easier removal in cases of spills or worn areas. Also, with the tiles much
of the office partitions and fiirniture can be lifted in place. The specifications require the
contractor to supply references of four to five year old tile installation and a new carpet tile
installation so that we can look at these to help determine if this is feasible for the Municipal
Center. The specifications require the discount price if we decide to install the broadloom rather
than the tiles.
Once the contractor has been selected we will meet with the staff committee to review the
proposals, make on-site inspections and make a recommendation to council on the color, design
and pattern.
BN/JHH:cz
23
f
GTY OF
FRIDLEY
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
March 26, 2001
To: William W. Burns, City Manager ��� ��
�'�� '
From: Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director
Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk
Date: March 19, 2001
Re: Scheduling of Public Hearing of Proposed Intoxicating Liquor License for King Club and
Restaurant, to be Located at 1051 East Moore Lake Drive
A liquor license application has been received from Man Ye Lewandowski for a restaurant bar to be
located at 1051 East Moore Lake Drive. The restaurant name is proposed to be King Club and
Restaurant and scheduled to open June 1, 2001.
A public hearing needs to be scheduled for the City Council to review the application. In addition,
the applicant has applied for a special use permit to a11ow intoxicating liquor in the location. If the
liquor license is approved by the City, the liquor application must also be reviewed and approved by
the state of Minnesota. In order to provide enough time to get the notice published and to send the
application to the state, staff is recommending a public hearing be held on Apri123`d. Final
approval of the license could then be scheduled for May 7, 2001, with the approval of the special
use permit.
Staff recommends scheduling a public hearing on Apri123, 2001.
24
�
�
cmr oF
FRIDLEY
To:
From:
Date:
e.
.
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
MARCH 26, 2001
William W. Burns, City Manager �
�
Jack Kirk, Director of Recreation and Natural Resources
March 21, 2001
Islands of Peace Visitor Center — Tamarisk Resources
In February of 1981, the City of Fridley and Anoka County entered into a joint powers
agreement for the operation and maintenance of the Islands of Peace Park as part of the
Regional Park system. Under this agreement, the City of Fridley retains ownership of
the park and must approve the lease of the property to a third party.
Anoka County has requested the City of Fridley's concurrence on a proposed lease of
the Islands of Peace Visitor Center to Tamarisk Resources. The attached letter from
John VonDeLinde, (Anoka County Director of Parks and Recreation) is the formal
request for City concurrence and provides more specifics on the proposed lease. This
lease arrangement was discussed at the City Council conference meeting on February
26 and there appeared to be Council support to move ahead.
I recommend that the City Council pass a motion in support of Anoka County entering
into a lease agreement with Tamarisk Resources for the use of the Islands of Peace
Visitor Center. When the City Council has taken action on this item, I will send a letter to
Mr. VonDeLinde to notify the County of the City's concurrence as specified in our joint
powers agreement.
:JK
25
John K. VonDeLinde
Director
Anoka County
Department of Parks and Recreation
550 Bunkec Lake Boulevard NW • Andover, Minnesota 55304
Telephone (763) 757-3920 • FAX (763) 75�-0230
March 13, 2001
Jack Kirk
Director of Recreation and Naturai Resources
City of Fridley
6431 University Avenue NE
Fridley, Minnesota 55432
Re: Islands of Peace Visitor Center - Tamarisk Resources
Dear Jack:
This letter is intended as a"follow-up", to our previous discussions regarding Tamarisk Resources. As I had
mentioned, Anoka County is considering the possibility of entering into a five year lease agreement with Tamarisk
Resources for their use of the Islands of Peace Visitor Center. As you know, Tamarisk is a private not-for-profit
organization providing support to the care givers of terminally ill people. Tamarisk is currently located in a house,
which they own, located in eastern Fridley on Mississippi Street. Tamarisk is seeking a new location for their o�ces
in order to provide better client services.
Tamarisk has approached Anoka County in request for the possible use of Islands of Peace Visitor Center. The
center would work very well for their program since it contains better parking, an outdoor setting for counseling and
therapeutic recreation, and other site amenities which support their mission. Their use of the building would be
confined to regular business hours Monday through Friday. The building would remain available to the general public
for rentals during evenings and weekends.
Anoka County is encouraged at the possible partnership with Tamarisk Resources. Our lease agreement with them
would provide a viable use of the building during daytime hours. They would be available to greet park customers
and show the facility to prospective renters. Our lease would also provide an on-going and stable source of revenue
to off-set operational cost of the structure. At the same time, Tamarisk would provide a valuable service to the
community, which mostly includes the Anoka County area. ___ _
We see very little conflict with Tamarisk Resources and the general public's use of the building. Very few rentals
occur during normal business hours. Therefore, this would appear to be a win-win situation both for Tamarisk, the
county, and the community as a whole.
Under the ]oint Powers Agreement between the City of Fridley and Anoka Cou�ty, I am required to inform you of
this planned lease by Anoka County. According to the Joint Powers Agreement, such leases can be exercised by
Anoka County with the concurrence of the Fridley City Council. Please consider this letter as a formal request for
city rev . Once we have received the city's concurrence, we will complete and execute the final lease agreement
with am risk Resources. My expectations is that Tamarisk would begin occupying the building in late summer or
me know if you would desire any additional details regarding the pending lease. Otherwise, I will look
hearing from you regarding the city's review on this matter.
Diredor of Parks and Recreation
cc: Commissioner Jim Kordiak Zs
� a
i .
�
�
r
�
CfTlf OF
FRIDLEY
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
Name Position
Lynne Captain
Tellers Exempt
Bankes
Michelle Sergeant
Gease Exempt
Appointment
Starting
Salary
$67, 922.64
per year
$61,825.68
per year
27
Starting
Date
April 2,
2001
April 2,
2001
Replaces
Gary
Lenzmeier
Lynne
Tellers
Bankes
�
L
CITY OF
FRIDLEY
AGENDA ITEM
COUNCIL MEETING OF
MARCH 26, 2001
CLAIMS
98459 - 98739
:
.
�
�
CRY OF
FRIDLEY
e
Type of License:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
MARCH 26, 2001
LAWFUL GAMBLING PERMIT
Woodcrest Elementary PTA
880 Osborne Road NE
Fridley, MN 55432
L/CENSES
�
Colleen Vranish
TREE REMOVAL AND TREATMENT
North Wood Co.
830 - 113`� Ave NE
Blaine, MN 55434
Patrick Gessell
29
Approved By:
Public Safety
Public Safety
Fee
Waived
$40
AGENDAITEM
City Council Meeting Of Monday, March 26, 2001
City of
Fridle
EI ri I
Control Air Minnesota Inc
492 Northdale Blvd NW
Coon Rapids MN 55448-
Gas Services
Air Corp Inc
13821 Industrial Park Blvd
Plymouth MN 55441-
Control Air Minnesota inc
492 Northdale Bivd NW
Coon Rapids MN 55448-
General Contractor-Commercial
American Stampings Inc
1290 73 Ave NE
Fridley MN 55432-
Harvey Construction
2180 Princeton Ave
St Paul MN 55105-
Johnson Milton Roofing Co
525 Lowry Ave NE
Minneapolis MN 55418-
Mikki Adelman
Sheila Northrup
Mikki Adelman
Duane Aukes
Daniel Klingner
Bruce Erickson
30
State of MN
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
Ron Julkowski
B�rilding Official
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
� �
.
�
�
� �
� «
. �
Rushing Commercial Construction Corp
13768 Reimer dr David Wanker
Maple Grove MN 55311-
Westby Paul Contractor
8320 Broad Ave NE Paul Westby
Fridley MN 55432-
General Contractor-Residential
Clapp Construction
652 155 Ave NW Julie Clapp
Andover MN 55304-
Franklin Builders Inc
7865 Beech St NE Thomas Peterson
Fridley MN 55432-
Harmony Homes Inc
3158 Viking Blvd NE Todd Blair
Wyoming MN 55092-
LaMill Construction
5921 Otterview Trl William LaBelle
White Bear Lake MN 55110-
Novak Ron Construction (20060819)
18410 Jackson St Ron Novak
East Bethel MN 55011-
OTL Installations
16170 Hyland Ave Bill Ariz
Lakeville MN 50044-
31
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
State of MN
State of MN
State of MN
State of MN
State of MN
State of MN
Thurs Construction (9346)
5717113 Ave N
Champlin MN 55316-
H in
Air Corp Inc
13821 Industrial Park Blvd
Plymouth MN 55441-
Control Air Minnesota Inc
492 Northdale Blvd NW
Coon Rapids MN 55448-
Schadegg Mechanical Inc
225 Bridgepoint Dr
S St Paul MN 55075-
Younger J C Company
5626 W Lake St
Minneapolis MN 55416-
Mobile Home Installer
Superior Mobile Home Service Inc
14305 Thnash St NW
Andover MN 55304-
PI m in
Central Plumbing Inc
7710 Corcoran Trl W
Corcoran MN 55340-
Kevin Thurs
Sheila Northrup
Mikki Adelman
Daniel Schadegg
Phil Schroer
Bill Kem
David Green
32
State of MN
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
Ron Julkowski
Building Official
State of MN
State of MN
.
.
Cherry Plumbing
PO Box 4261
Hopkins MN 55343-
P � D Mechanical Contracting
4629 41 Ave N
Robbinsdale MN 55422-
John Cherry
Bill Daugherty
33
State of MN
State of MN
�
�
ar�r oF
FRIDLEY
Carl J. Newquist, Esq.
Newquist & Ekstrum, Chartered
301 Fridley Plaza O�ce Building
6401 University Avenue N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
MARCH 26, 2001
ESTIMATES
Services Rendered as City Prosecuting Attorney
for the Month of December, 2000 ...............................
34
...................................... $13,890.20
0
n
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
QTY OF
FRIDLEY
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager��!�
4�
FROM: Jon H. Haukaas, Public Works Director
DATE: March 26, 2001
PWO1-027
SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Stinson Blvd Street Improvement Project No. ST 2001 - 2
The Ciry of New Brighton has proposed to reconstruct Stinson Blvd from Mississippi Street to
67`� Avenue as part of their 2001 street improvement project. An informational meeting was
held on January 17, 2001 and the affected Fridley residents were invited.
The Ciry of New Brighton held their public hearing on the project March 13. No residents
from Fridley spoke at that meeting.
This project will include assessments for concrete curb and gutter per City policy. A public
hearing on these assessments was set for March 26, 2001 by the City Council at their March 5,
2001 meeting.
JHH:cz
35
�
�
CRY OF
FRIDLEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
MARCH 26, 2001
�
William W. Burns, City Manager��
Dave Sallman, Director of Public Safety
March 22, 2001
Walgreen's Tobacco License
On February 26, 2001, an agenda item to consider revocation of the tobacco license for
Walgreen's was tabled at the request of the licensee in order for them to review the
history leading up to the revocation request. The hearing was tabled until the March 26,
2001, meeting. Attached is a memorandum dated February 22, 2001, outlining the
history of this matter. �
Staff recommends revoking Walgreen's tobacco license for a period of one year.
Attachment
���
.
u
0
t:ffY OF
FRIDLE7
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
FEBRUARY 26, 2001
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager
FROM: Dave Sallman, Director of Public Safety
DATE: February 22, 2001
SUBJECT: Walgreen's Tobacco License
Attached is a letter that was sent via certified mail to the store manager of Walgreen
Drug Store on February 9, 2001. We conducted tobacco compliance checks on
Walgreen's on February 5, 2000, November 25, 2000, and most recently on February 4,
2001. In addition to those dates, a compliance check was conducted on September 22,
1999. On each occasion, the employee of Walgreen's sold tobacco products to a
person under the age of 18. Chapter 12 of the City Code provides that the City may
revoke (permanently) the tobacco license of any licensee that has violated this provision
three times within a twelve-month period.
I have spoken with City Attorney Fritz Knaak, and his advice was to place the license
revocation on the agenda of a regular City Council meeting for consideration and action.
It is staff's recommendation that the tobacco license for Walgreen's be revoked (or not
approved) for the licensing period beginning April 1, 2001, for a period of one year.
Our procedure for the compliance checks is to hire a person under the age of 18 to go
into the licensee's place of business and attempt to purchase tobacco products. The
juvenile is under the supervision of a licensed police officer. If the licensee or their
employee asks for identification, the juvenile informs them that they have no
identification in their possession or the juvenile provides a license identifying them as
being underage (their actual ID). If the employee sells tobacco products to the juvenile,
the officer brings it to the attention of the employee and any management present.
Since the ordinance provides for increasing penalties for the number of consecutive
violations within a finrelve-month period, those licensees who fail are given additional
opportunities to fail (or pass) within the finrelve-month period. Due to an oversight, we
failed to perform the compliance checks within the twelve-month period from September
22, 1999.
37
Walgreen's Tobacco License
February 26, 2001
Page 2
We have never had a licensee fail 3 consecutive compliance checks (much less 4) prior
to Walgreen's. On each occasion a letter (attached) was sent to the store manager
explaining the ordinance and the consequence of noncompliance. Staff recommends
revocation of Walgreen's tobacco license for a period of one year.
c: Richard Pribyl, Finance Director
�
-
_
CITY OF
FRIDLEY David H. Sallman
P�L'ICE Public Safety Director
FRIDLEY POLICE DEPaRT`!E: �T • 6�i31 UNIVERSITY �►�'E. N.E. FRIDLEY, b[Y 55432 •(763) 572-3629 • FAX (763) 572-3651
.
February 9, 2001
David Caroon-Store bianager
Walgreen's Drug Store
6�2� University Ave. NE
FridIey, 1�L�1 55432
Dear Lir. Ca:oon,
Fridley City Ordinance Chapter 12, which is titled "Tobacco Products" and provides for
civil penalties against the licensee if an employee is found to have sold tobacco products
to a person under the age of 18. I have enclosed a copy of Chapter 12 of the City Code.
Employees of Walgreen's sold tobacco products to a person under the age of 18 on
February 5, 2040; I�iovember 25, 2000 and on February 4, 2001. Chapter 12.09 (B) states
cna� tne Cit; may revoke (permanently) the tobacco license of any licensee following the
third vio(ation within a twelve month period.
The Fridley City Ccuncil will consider revocation of the tobacco license for the
Walgreen's Drug Store during the regulaz Council Meeting on Monday, February 26,
2001 at 7:30 PM. Please contact City Attorney Fritz Knaak (651-490-9078) or myself
(763-572-3625) if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Si cerely,
�/� .
David H. Saliman
Public Safery Director
City of Fridley
��
C[TYOF
FRlDLEY
FRIDLEY `lC: �ICIP�L CE`TER • 6�3! U�I`'ERSITY �VE. v.E. FRIDLEY, �IN �5-t32 •(6t2) �71-3-i�0 • F,�.Y (6l2) 571-1387
December 19, 2000
1,Valgrzens
Store �tanager
6�?' Universiry :��: er,ue � �
Fridley.l�t� >j-i;3
Dear Store �lanager,
This lettzr is to notify you of a�1000 penalry that must be paid to the City of Fridley within 20 days from receipt
of this letter.
On �o��ember 2�, ar.d December 9, 2000, the Fridley Police conducted tobacco compliance checks on all of the
businzsses holding a tobacco license. Of the 37 compliance checks, 6 businesses sold tobacco oroducts to
minors. Your busir.ess is one of those businzsses that sold a tobacco product to a minor. Your business also sotd
tubacco produccs �o minors on Februacy �, 2000, ma'.cin� this your second violation �vithin 12 months. I am
e.^.ctosing a complet: copy of the tobacco ordinancz for your information. Section 12.09, subd. (b) of the
Ordinancz regula;es trr penalties for licensees who sell tobacco products to minors:
!j cc licensee er �n employee of a licen�ze is jound to have sold tobacco to a person cinder the ci�e of !8
;�zurs, thz licensee shall be subject to an administrative penalry as follows:
Firs: L'iola[ion. Tice penalry• for tne fcrst violation is 3.i00. If the f:ne is not paid ��•itnir. '0 days
the Cir; may sccrpend the licensee to sell tobacco products for a period not to exceed 10 days.
Second violation within 12 months. The penalty for the second violation is SI000. Ij the fine is
not paid within 20 days the ciry may sc�spend the license to sell tobacco prod:rcts for a period not
to ecceed 30 days.
Third violation within ll rreonths. The City rnay permanently revoke the tobacco license.
If you should decide not to pay the penalty, the Ciry may suspend your licensee to sell tobacco products. You
should also be aw•are there is an appeal process and that process is outlined in Secrion 12.08 of the ordinance.
Unless you plan to appeal the penalty please send a check for $1000 to the City of Fridley within the 20 day
period. Also, be aware that if your business sells tobacco products to a minor a third time �vithin a year,
the City may vermanentiv revoke your tobacco license. If you have any questions please call me at 572-
3632.
S�mcerely, '�
�_� � '
.
_ \ �, ��
Ga Lenz eie� �
Deputy Pu �ic Safety Director
City of Fridley
. �
-
_
�,, �' .
� �
/ � �( �'/
� b�
� �' -
� � `,; �'/� /
CIi OF v U �; � r.�'
FItIDL�.i' � ^ �`�' . /
, � �.
FRlDLEY �t�'`tC(P.aL CE�TER • 6-�3 i Uv[�'ERSITY �vE. N.E. FRIDLEY. �cN 55�32 •�613> 57 t-3-�50 • F.aX (61 �t 2g�
,
February 8, 2000
Store �tanager
1�Val�reens
6�? i Universitv :��enue ��E
FridIey, �i�i >j432
Dear Store �[anager,
This letter is to notify you of a$1000 penalty that must be paid to the City of Fridley within 20 days from receipt
of this letter.
On February 5, 2000, the Fridley Police conducted tobacco compliance checks on the businesses which failed a
tobacco compliance check in 1999. Of the 1� businesses that were checked, 3 businesses sold tobacco products.
to mir.ors. Your business is one of those businesses that sold a tobacco product to a minor. Your business also
sold tobacco producv to minors on September 22, 1999 making this your second violation within 12 months. I
am enclosing a complete copy of the tobacco ordinance for your information. Section 12.09, subd. (b) of the
Ordinance regulates the penatties for licensees who sell tobacco produets to minors:
!f a licensee or an employee of a licensee is found to have sold tobacco to a person c�nder the age oj 1$
years, the licensee shall be subject to an administrative penalry as foilows:
First G'iolation. The penalry for the first violation is 5�00. !f the fine is not paid within ?0 days
the Ciry may suspend the licensee to sell tobacco products jor a period not to eYCeed !0 days.
Second violation within 12 months. The penalry for the second violation is 51000. If the fine is
not paid within 20 days the city may suspend the license to sel! tobacco products for a period not
to exceed 30 days.
Third violation within !2 months. The City may permanently revoke the tobacco license.
If you should decide not to pay the penalry, the City may suspend your licensee to sell tobacco products. You
should also be aware there is an appeal process and that process is outlined in Section 12.08 of the ordinance.
. Unless you plan to appeal the penalry please send a check for � 1000 to the City of Fridley within the 20 day
period. Also, be aware that if your business sells tobacco products to a minor a third time within a year,
} the City may permanently revoke your tobacco licease. If you have any questions plesse call me at 572-
3632. �
S._ incerely, � _
�`-�``�,
�`-'�'"�' �` .
Gary Len eier
Deputy P blic Safety Director
Ciry of Fridley
41
_
_
CIiY OF
FRIDLEY
FRIDLEY MUNICIPAL CE�1'iER • 6-t31 UNIVERS[TY AVE. [Y.E. FRIDLEY, 1�tN SS�132 •(61?) 571-3d50 • FAX (612) 571-1287
Store Manager
Walgreens
6527 University �venue NE
Fridley, MN 5�432
Dear , Store �ianager
September 24, 1999
This letter is to notify you of a S500 penalty that must be paid to the City of Fridley within 20 days from
receipt of this letter.
On September 22, 1999, the Fridley Police conducted tobacco compliance checks on the businesses in
Fridley which sell tobacco products. Of the 36 businesses checked, 9 businesses sold tobacco products
to minors. Your business is one of those businesses that sold a tobacco product to a minor. I am
enclosing a complete copy of the tobacco ordinance for your informarion. Section 12.09, subd. (b) of the
Ordinance regulates the penalties for licensees who sell tobacco products to minors:
IJa lice�rsee or an employee oja licensee is found to have sold tobacco to a person under the age
oJ 18 years, the licerrsee shall be subject to an administrative penalty crs follows:
First l�iolation. The penalty jor the frst violation is 3.i00. IJthe fine is not paid within
ZO days the Ciry may suspend the licensee to se!! tobacco products for a period not to
erceed 10 days.
Second violation within 12 months. The penalty for the second violation is �51000. If the
fcne is not paid within 20 days the ciry rrray suspend the licerue to sell tobacco products
jor a psriod not fo exceed 30 days.
Third violation within 12 months. The City niay permanently revoke the tobacco license.
If you should decide not to pay the penalty, the City may suspend your licensee to sell tobacco products.
You should also be aware there is an appeal process and that process is outlined in Section 12.08 of the
ordinance.
Unless you plan to appeal the penalty please send a check for �500 to the City of Fridley within the 20
day period. If you have any questions please call me at 572-3632. •
Sincerely,
Deputy Pub
City of Frid
�I
i
�eier
ic Safety Director
` T,
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2001
CfTY OF
FRIDLEY
DATE: March 22, 2001
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager '�� �
y('.
FROM: Scott J. Hickok, Community Development Director
Grant Fernelius, Housing Coordinator
SUBJECT: 2�d and Final Reading of Manufactured Home Park Closure
Ordinance
On March 5, 2001 the City Council approved the first reading of this ordinance
with two amendments. Staff has made those changes, which are referenced in
this memo under Changes #2 and #3. In addition, staff has also made a couple
of minor text changes (see Change #1) and re-numbered the last two sections of
the ordinance (see Change #4).
Summarv of Chanaes
CHANGE #1 (Text Modification)
223.06. DISPLACED RESIDENT OBLIGATIONS
As a condition of receiving assistance under this Chapter, a displaced resident
shall submit a contract or other verified cost estimate of relocation costs to the
park owner for approval. If the park owner refuses to pay the contract or other
verified cost estimate, the park owner must arrange for relocating the
manufactured home and pay the actual relocation costs incurred. In the
alternative, the displaced resident may submit a written statement to the park
owner, identifying that the displaced resident either cannot or chooses not to
relocate his or her manufactured home to another manufactured home park
within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park to 6e closed and elects to
receive either relocation assistance as defined in � 223.07.02 or
compensation as defined in 223.08.
43
PCO Memo
March 22, 2001
Page 2
CHANGE #2 (Text Modification)
223.08. ELECTION TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION
If a displaced resident chooses not to relocate the manufactured home within a
twenty-five (25)-mile radius of the park that is being closed and tenders title of
the manu-factured home to the park owner, the displaced resident is entitled to
compensation, to be paid by the purchaser of the park in order to mitigate the
adverse financial impact of the park closing. In such instance, the compensation
shall be an amount equal to:
1. The current fair market value of the manufactured home as determined
by a real property appraiser licensed by the State of Minnesota, or
2. If no appraisal exists, the current assessed value for tax purposes of
the manufactured home as established by Anoka County.
Under 223.08.01, the appraisal may be provided by either the displaced resident,
the park owner or the purchaser. Any disputes over valuation shall be resolved
through judicial action in Anoka County District Court. The purchaser shall pay
such compensation into an escrow account, established by the park owner, for
distribution upon transfer of title to the manufactured home. Such compensation
shall be paid to the displaced resident sixty (60) days prior to closing of the park,
conversion to another use, or later at resident option and the park owner shall
receive title and possession of the manufactured home upon payment of such
compensation.
CHANGE #3 (New Text)
223.09 LIMITATION ON TOTAL AMOUNT OF RELOCATION
ASSISTANCE AND COMPENSATION PAID TO DISPLACED
RESIDENTS
The total amount of relocation assistanoe and oompensa�on paid �
displaced residents of the manufactured home park shall not exceed
the greater of twenty percent (20%) of the County Assessor's
estimat�eed market vafue of the manufactured home park, as determined
..
PCO Memo
March 22, 2001
Page 3 �
by the County Assessor for the year in which the park is scheduled to
dose, or twenty peroent (20%) of the purchase priae of the park.
CHANGE #4 (Sections Renumbered)
"� 223.10. APPLICABILITY
,�'� 223.11. PENALTIES
Additional Information
Attached is the revised draft of the ordinance which incorporates all of the above
changes. In addition, you will also find a summary of the ordinance which will
be published in the Focus News. If adopted, the ordinance would become
effective fifteen (15) days after publication.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the second reading of the
Manufactured Home Park Closure Ordinance as presented and the Summary
Ordinance which will be published in the City's Official Newspaper.
M-00-33
45
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 223,
CONCERNING MANUFACTURED HOME PARKS, REQUIRING OWNERS TO
PAY RELOCATION EXPENSES TO DISPLACED RESIDENTS UPON PARK
CLOSINGS.
The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. The Fridley City Code is amended by adding Chapter 223 to read
as follows:
MANUFACTURED HOME PARK CLOSINGS
223.01. PURPOSE
In view of the peculiar nature and problems presented by the closure or conversion of
manufactured home parks, the City Council finds that the public health, safety and
general welfare will be promoted by requiring compensation to displaced residents of
such parks. The purpose of this ordinance is to require park owners to pay displaced
residents reasonable relocation costs and purchasers of manufactured home parks to
pay additional compensation, pursuant to the authority granted under Minnesota
Statutes, Section 327C.095.
223.02. DEFINITIONS
The following words and terms when used in this ordinance shall have the following
meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
1. Closure Statement.
A statement prepared by the park owner clearly stating the park is closing, addressing --
the availability, location and potential costs of adequate replacement housing within a
twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park that is closing and the probable relocation costs
of the manufactured homes located in the park.
2. Displaced Owner.
A resident of an owner-occupied manufactured home who rents a lot in a manufactured
home park, including the members of the resident's household, as of the date the park
owner submits a closure statement to the City's Planning Commission.
3. Displaced Resident.
A displaced owner.
Page 1
46
4. Lot.
An area within a manufactured home park, designed and used for the accommodation
of a manufactured home.
5. Manufactured Home.
A structure, not affixed to or part of real estate, transportable in one of more sections,
which in the traveling mode, is eight (8) feet or more in width or forty (40) feet or more in
length, or, when erected on site, is three hundred twenty (320) or more square feet, and
which is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a dwelling with or
without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities, and includes
the plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and electrical system contained in it.
6. Park Closure.
A closure, conversion of use, or termination of use, whether in whole or in part, of a
manufactured home park. For purposes of this definition, use shall mean any use
related to the manufactured home park and related services.
7. Park Owner.
The owner of a manufactured home park.
8. Person.
Any individual, corporation, firm, partnership, incorporated and unincorporated
association or any other legal or commercial entity.
9. Purchaser.
The person buying the manufactured home park from the park owner. In the event that
the park owner intends to retain ownership and convert the park to a different use, all
references to the purchaser refer to the park owner.
10. Relocation Cost.
The reasonable cost of relocating a manufactured home from a manufactured home
park within the City of Fridley that is being closed or converted to another use to another
manufactured home park within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park as follows:
A. Preparation for Move.
The reasonable costs incurred to prepare the eligible manufactured home for
transportation to anothe� site. This category includes crane services if needed,
but not the cost of wheel axles, tires, frame welding or trailer hitches.
Page 2
47
B. Transportation to Another Site.
Reasonable costs incurred to transport the eligible manufactured home and
personal property within a twenty-five (25) mile radius. This category also
includes the cost of insuring the manufactured home and contents while the
home is in the process of being relocated, and the cost of obtaining moving
permits provided that the park owner shall not be required to pay delinquent
taxes on a manufactured home if necessary in order to obtain a moving permit.
This category also includes the reasonable cost of disassembling, moving, and
reassembling sheds and any attached appurtenances, such as porches, steps,
decks, skirting, air conditioner units and awnings, which were acquired be#ore the
notice of closure or conversion of the park.
C. Hook-up at New Location.
The reasonable cost of connecting the eligible manufactured home to utilities at
the relocation site, including crane services if needed. The park owner shall not
be required to upgrade the electrical or plumbing systems of the manufactured
home.
D. Insurance.
The cost of insurance for the replacement value of the property being moved.
Relocation costs do not include the cost of any repairs or modifications to the manu-
factured home needed to bring the home into compliance with the state and federal
manufactured home building standards for the year in which the home was constructed.
Relocation costs also do not include the cost of any repairs or modifications to the home
or appurtenances needed to bring the home or appurtenances into compliance with the
rules and regulations of the manufactured home park to which the manufactured home
is to be relocated, if those rules and regulations are no more stringent than the rules
and regulations of the park in which the home is located and the resident was notified of
non-compliance with the rules and regulations of the park in which it is located within
sixty (60) days prior to delivery of the closure statement.
223.03. PARK CLOSURE NOTICE
If a manufactured home park is to be closed, converted in whole or part to another use
or terminated as a use of the property, the park owner shall, at least nine (9) months
prior to the closure, conversion to another use or termination of use, provide a copy of a
closure statement to a resident of each manufactured home and to the City's Planning
Commission.
Page 3
48
223.04. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City's Planning Commission shall submit the closure statement to the City Council
and request the City Council to schedule a public hearing. The City shall mail a notice
at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing to a resident of each manufactured
home in the park stating the time, place and purpose of the hearing. The park owner
shall provide the City with a list of the names and addresses of at least one displaced
resident of each manufactured home in the park at the time the closure statement is
submitted to the City's Planning Commission.
223.05. PUBLIC HEARING
A public hearing shall be held before the City Council after receipt of the closure
statement for the purpose of reviewing the closure statement and evaluating what
impact the park closing may have on the displaced residents and the park owner.
223.06. DISPLACED RESIDENT OBLIGATIONS
As a condition of receiving assistance under this Chapter, a displaced resident shall
submit a contract or other verified cost estimate of relocation costs to the park owner for
approval. If the park owner refuses to pay the contract or other verified cost estimate,
the park owner must arrange for relocating the manufactured home and pay the actual
relocation costs incurred. In the alternative, the displaced resident may submit a written
statement to the park owner, identifying that the displaced resident either cannot or
chooses not to relocate his or her manufactured home to another manufactured home
park within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park to be closed and elects to receive
either relocation assistance as defined in 223.07.02 or compensation as defined in
223.08.
223.07. ELECTION TO RELOCATE
After service of the closure statement by the park owner and upon submittal by the
displaced resident of a contract or other verification of relocation expenses, the park
owner shall pay to the displaced resident the reasonable costs as defined in
223.02.10 of relocating the manufactured home to another manufactured home park
located within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park that is being closed,
converted to another use, or ceasing operation.
2. If a displaced resident cannot or chooses not to relocate the manufactured home
within a twenty-five (25) mile radius of the park which is being closed, and the
displaced resident elects to retain title to the manufactured home, the displaced
resident is entitled to relocation costs as defined in 223.02 based upon an average
of the actual relocation costs paid to other displaced residents in the manufactured
home park. For purposes of this section, in the event that it is not possible to
calculate the average using this formula, the amount of compensation shall be
Page 4
49
based on the average of the estimated relocation costs submitted by other residents
in the park.
3. A displaced resident compensated under this section shall retain title to the
manufactured home and shall be responsible for its prompt removal from
the manufactured home park.
4. The park owner shall make the payments under this section directly to the person
performing the relocation services after performance thereof, or, upon submission of
written evidence of payment of relocation costs by a displaced resident, shall
reimburse the displaced resident for such costs.
5. The displaced resident must submit a contract orother verified cost estimate for
relocating the manufactured home to the park owner as a condition to the park
owner's liability to pay relocation expenses.
223.08. ELECTION TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION
If a displaced resident chooses not to relocate the manufactured home within a twenty
five (25)-mile radius of the park that is being closed and tenders title of the
manufactured home to the park owner, the displaced resident is entitled to
compensation, to be paid by the purchaser of the park in order to mitigate the adverse
financial impact of the park closing. In such instance, the compensation shall be an
amount equal to:
The current fair market value of the manufactured home as determined by a real
property appraiser licensed by the State of Minnesota, or
2. If no appraisal exists, the current assessed value for tax purposes of the
manufactured home as established by Anoka County.
Under 223.08.01, the appraisal may be provided by either the displaced resident; the
park owner or the purchaser. Any disputes over valuation shall be resolved through
judicial action in Anoka County District Court. The purchaser shall pay such
compensation into an escrow account, established by the park owner, for distribution
upon transfer of title to the manufactured home. Such compensation shall be paid to
the displaced resident sixty (60) days prior to closing of the park, conversion to another
use, or later at resident option and the park owner shall receive title and possession of
the manufactured home upon payment of such compensation.
223.09. LIMITATION ON TOTAL AMOUNT OF RELOCATION AS5ISTANCE
AND COMPENSATION PAID TO DISPLACED RESIDENTS
The total amount of relocation assistance and compensation paid to displaced residents
of the manufactured home park, shall not exceed the greater of finrenty percent (20%) of
the County Assessor's estimated market value of the manufactured home park, as
Page 5
50
determined by the County Assessor for the year in which the park is scheduled to close,
or twenty percent (20%) of the purchase price of the park.
223.10. APPLICABILITY
Relocation assistance and related compensation described under 223.02, 223.07 and
223.08 of this ordinance shall not apply in the event that a displaced resident receives
compensation under the Uniform Relocation Act et. al. (42 U.S.C. 4601-4655).
223.11. PENALTIES
1. Violation of any provision of this ordinance shall be a misdemeanor.
2. Any provisions of this ordinance may be enforced by injunction or other appropriate
civil remedy.
3. The City shall not issue a building permit in conjunction with reuse of manufactured
home park property unless the park owner has paid reasonable location costs and
the purchaser of the park has provided compensation in accordance with the
requirements of the ordinance. Approval of any application for rezoning, platting,
conditional use permit, planned unit development or variance in conjunction with a
park closing or conversion shall be conditional on compliance with the requirements
of this ordinance.
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days
after its passage and publication.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Publication:
March 5, 2001
March 26, 2001
April 5, 2001
, 2001.
Page 6
51
SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR
ORDINANCE NO.
OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY
I. Title
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FRIDLEY CITY CODE TO ADD CHAPTER 223,
CONCERNING MANUFACTURED HOME PARKS, REQUIRING OWNERS TO
PAY RELOCATION EXPENSES TO DISPLACED RESIDENTS UPON PARK
CLOSINGS.
II. Summary
The City Council of the City of Fridley, Minnesota does hereby ordain as follows:
That the Fridley City Code is amended by adding Chapter 223, entitled "Manufactured
Home Park Closings". In view of the peculiar nature and problems presented by the
closure or conversion of manufactured home parks, the City Council finds that the public
health, safety and general welfare will be promoted by requiring compensation to
displaced residents of such parks. The purpose of this ordinance is to require park
owners to pay displaced residents reasonable relocation costs and purchasers of
manufactured home parks to pay additional compensation, pursuant to the authority
granted under Minnesota Statutes, Section 327C.095.
The ordinance requires the owners of manufactured home parks to provide the City with
a nine (9) month notice of closure and the City is required to conduct a public hearing to
review the impact of the park closure,
Displaced residents are entitled to reasonable relocation expenses for a move within a 25
mile radius of the park to be closed. In the event a displaced resident either cannot or
chooses not to move their manufactured home to another park within a 25 mile radius,
and retains title to the manufactured home, the displaced resident is entitled to relocation
costs based on the average of relocation costs paid to other displaced residents. In the
event a displaced resident either cannot or chooses not to move their manufactured home
to another park within a 25 mile radius, but tenders title to the manufactured home, the
displaced resident is entitled to compensation based on the appraised value of the
manufactured home. If no appraisal exists, the compensation shall be based on the
assessed value for tax purposes.
The total amount of relocation assistance and compensation paid to displaced residents of
the manufactured home park, shall not exceed the greater of twenty percent (20%) of the
County Assessor's estimated market value of the manufactured home park, as determined
by the County Assessor for the year in which the park is scheduled to close, or twenty
percent (20%) of the purchase price of the park.
Page 1 March 5, 2001
52
III. Notice
This Title and Summary have been published to clearly inform the public of the intent
and effect of the Manufactured Home Park Closure Ordinance. A copy of the ordinance,
in its entirety, is available for inspection by any person during regular business hours at
the offices of the City Clerk of the City of Fridley, 6431 University Avenue NE, Fridley,
MN 55432.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 2001.
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
First Reading:
Second Reading
Publication:
March 5, 2001
March 26, 2001
Apri15, 2001
Page 2
53
SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR
March 5, 2001
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
F° p°� MARCH 26, 2001
To: William W. Bums, City Manager��� �
d
From: Richazd D. Pribyl, Finance Director
Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk
Date: March 19, 2001
Re: First Reading of Proposed Charter Amendment on Chapter 7 of the Fridley Charter
Pertaining to Taxation and Finances
A public hearing was held on March 5, 2001, on the proposed Charter Amendment. Attachment 1
is the proposed ordinance for your review and first reading.
54
�
0
Y
0
�
:��?L�� �� �,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 7 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER
PERTAINING TO TAXATION AND FINANCES
The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows:
That Section 7.02.1 of the Fridley City Charter be hereby amended as follows:
Section 7.02. POWER OF TAXATION
1. The City shall have, in addition to the powers by this Charter expressly or impliedly
granted, all the powers to raise money by taxation pursuant to the laws of the State which aze
applicable to cities of the class of which it may be a member from time to time, provided that the
amount of taxes levied against real and personal property within the City for general City
purposes shall not exceed in dollars, a tax levy that is greater than the prior yeaz tax levy
increased by an inflationary index, or 5%, whichever is least. Said inflarionary index shall be
that as defined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price
Index for all Urban Consumers in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area. (Ref. Ord. 592
and 1102 and 11 /7/00 Amendment)
NothinQ in this nrovision shall be construed to impair anv Qeneral obliQation the Citv mav have in
supnort of otherwise lawful indebtedness or similar obli,eation sunvorted bv the full faith and credit
of'the Citv, provided, however, that lonQ-term. Qeneral obliQation indebtedness shall not be used for
the nurnose offundin�? the routine and dailv business onerations ofthe Czty.
That Section 7.02.3 of the Fridley City Charter be hereby amended as follows:
3. Any other fees created, or increased beyond the limits set forth in subsection 1, shall require
voter approval as stipulated in subsection 2.
A. For purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes, , sales
and use taxes, , , ' , � ,
utili char es
recvclinQ fees, Qas and electric franchise fees and anv other fee that produces a tax
burden or direct financial obli�ation for all pronertv owners and/or residents ofFridlev.
B. For the purposes of this section, the term "fees" does not include: Parks and Recreation
Department participation fees, charges for photo-copying, sales of municipal liquor store
products, or civil and criminal fines and other charges collected in cases of restitution or
violation of law or contract. The term "fees " also does not include rental housin� fees.
buildin� permit fees, liquor license fees, the extension or transfer of cable television
service authoritv to additional service nroviders for which fees are. alreadv being
charged, fees for the operation of iunk
55
Ordinance No.
Page 3
vards, annual license fees for the operation ofnawn shons and other regulated
business, and anv other charge for services, includinQ health and safetv related
Code enforcement, and other Qoods, services or materials routinelv nrovided bv
the Citv to its citizens or other members oithe public which, bv law, must be
limited to the actual cost of the service being nrovided. The term "fees " shall not
include anv snecial assessments made under Minnesota Statutes �429.
C. For the purposes of this subsection, "fee increase" include ,
�s; a new tax or fee, a monetary increase in an existing tax or fee, a tax or fee rate
increase, an expansion in the legal definition of a tax or fee base, and an extension of an
expiring tax or fee.
D. For the purposes of this subsection, "city" include , , the
City itself and all of its departments and agencie ',
' that are organized to
exercise the "Powers of the Citv " as defined in Chanter 1 of this Charter. "Citv" shall
not include anv bodv oiQOVernment owinQ its existence to senarate constitutional or
statutorv authoritv outside oithe Charter, re�ardless of whether that other bodv of
Qovernment has iurisdiction or nerforms duties and services within the boundaries of the
C�
E. For the purpose of addressing natural disasters this subsection does not apply to any
specific emergency measure authorized in Chapter 7, Section .08 (7.08).
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY TF� CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF 2001.
ATTEST:
Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk
Public Hearing: Mazch 5, 2001
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Publication:
56
Scott J. Lund, Mayor
�
�
CRY OF
FRIDLEY
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
MARCH 26, 2001
�
TO: William W. Burns, City Manager��
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Dave Sallman, Director of Public Safety
Tobacco License Request/Dennis G. Buchanan
March 22, 2001
I am writing this to recommend denial of the license request for a tobacco license from Dennis
George Buchanan (DOB August 29, 1945). Mr. Buchanan was arrested by the Anoka-Hennepin
Drug Task Force on October 23, 1992 following execution of a search warrant at his residence in
Brooklyn Park. Mr. Buchanan was subsequently charged and convicted with Minnesota Statute
152.025.1.1, which is possession of marijuana with intent to sell. According to the police report,
Mr. Buchanan had a marijuana "grow operation" complete with grow light. The grow area was
secreted behind a false wall (screwed in plywood) and contained 32 marijuana plants. There was
a second grow room with an additiona130 marijuana plants.
The City has determined that the sale of tobacco products is an activity that it chooses to regulate
through licensing. The State of Minnesota restricts the sale of tobacco products to those persons
18 years and older. Within the past ten years, Mr. Buchanan has been charged and convicted of
a felony drug chazge pertaining to the sale and distribution of an illegal substance. I believe that
there is a reasonable public interest to restrict the licensing of a convicted felon in a regulated
industry. The liquor license requirements under Ordinance 603.08 require that a licensee be "of
good moral character and repute". It also restricts licensing of anyone convicted of a crime
involving the product (intoxicating liquor) within the past 15 yeazs. I do not believe that it is
unreasonable to apply the same thought process to a tobacco licensee. The public concern over
use of tobacco products by children is well documented. We are required by Minnesota law to
conduct compliance checks of the licensees for the sale of tobacco products to children. There
are a number of children that frequent the strip mall where Mr. Buchanan intends to locate his
shop. I do not believe that it is in the best interests of the people of Fridley to provide a tobacco
license to Mr. Buchanan at this time and at this location.
A background check revealed that Mr. Buchanan currently owns 5 businesses. They are all adult
(sexually oriented) businesses with one in Minneapolis also having a tobacco license. Three of
the businesses are in Minneapolis and one each in Winona and Rochester. There is no issue
relative to the adult sexually oriented businesses as Ordinance 127.05 regulating sexually
oriented businesses would prohibit such a business at this location due to proximity to residential
property. A records check with the respective law enforcement agencies of the above listed
cities revealed no problems. Staff recommends denial at this time.
57
CITY OF FRIDLEY COMMISStON TERMS THAT WILL EXPIRE IN 2001
FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Term
Present Members Expires Appointee
PLANNING COMMISSION (Chapter 6) (7 Members - 3 Year Term)
GENERAL Diane Savage 4-1-03
CHAIR
VICE-CHAIR
i
CHAIR David Kondrick 4-1-03
PARKS 8
REC. `
CHAIR Barbara Johns 4-1-01
ENVIRON.
QUALITY
CHAIR Larry Kuechle 4-1-02
APPEALS
COMM.
CHAIR LeRoy Oquist 4-1-01
HUMAN
RES.
AT Dean Saba 4-1-01
LARGE
AT Connie Modig 4-1-02
LARGE
APPEALS COMMISSION (Chapter 6)(5 Members - 3 Year Term)
CHAIR Larry Kuechle 4-1-02
VICE- Jon Tynjala 4-1-03
CHAIR
Blaine Jones 4-1-01
Kenneth Vos 4-1-02
Susan Jackson 4-1-03
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY (Chapter 6) (7 Members — 3 Year Term)
AND ENERGY COMMISSION
CHAIR Barbara Johns 4-1-01 �
VICE- Jack Velin 4-1-02 �
t
CHAIR
Richard Svanda 4-1-03
�
Barbara Kovacic 4-1-03
Peter Panchyshyn 4-1-02
Mary Gliniany 4-1-01
Michelle
McCulloch Maher 4-1-01 �
:
Term
Present Members Ex ires
HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION (Chapter 6) (5 Members - 3 Year Term)
CHAIR LeRoy Oquist 4-1-01
� Eilen Raeker 4-1-03
�
Terrie Mau 4-1-02
Annette E. Mitchell 4-1-02
Satveer Chaudhary 4-1-01
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION (Chapter 6) (5 Members-3 Yr. Term)
CHAIR David Kondrick 4-1-03
VICE- Richard Young 4-1-01
CHAIR
Susan Price 4-1-02
Marcy Sibell 4-1-03
Tim Solberg 4-1-01
CABLE TELEVISION COMMISSION (Sec. 405.28)(5 Members-3 Yr. Term)
CHAIR Burt Wea�er 4-1-02
VICE- Dianne McKusick 4-1-03
CHAIR
Robert Scott 4-1-03
Brad Sielaff 4-1-02
Gen Peterson 4-1-01
POLICE COMMISSION (Chapter 102)(3 Members - 3 Year Term)
CHAIR Mavis Hauge 4-1-01
John Burton 4-1-02
�
John Hinsverk 4-1-03
` HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (5 Members - 5 Year Term)
CHAIR Larry Commers 6-9-04
VICE- Virginia Schnabel 6-9-05
CHAIR
Jay Bajwa 6-9-02
John E. Meyer 6-9-01
Pat Gabel 6-9-03 59
��
FRIDLEY
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF
MARCH 26, 2001
INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS
.�
C
:�ale of'A�cohdlic Bever�'ges and Tobacco Products
http://walnet.walgreens.com/hrdev/b...ping/legalissues/alcoholtobacco.htm
Sale of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco Products (cigarettes,
cigars, tobacco, Snuff) (Revised 08/10/00)
To ensure that employees are trained to comply with Company policy and state law regarding the
sale of alcoholic beverages and tobacco products to customers.
Alcohol
• Customers must be at least 21 years of age to purchase liquor.
• Alcoholic beverages must not be sold by anyone under the age of 21 years in stores that
have a separate liquor department (regardless of state law). In stores that do not have a
separate liquor department, alcoholic beverages must not be sold by anyone under the legal
age to sell those beverages as defined by your state law and/or local ordinances.
• At the minimum, the clerk must ask each youthful-appearing customer for a valid driver's
license to ensure the customer is of legal age.
• If the employee doubts the age of the customer regardless of the proof of age shown, refuse
the sale.
Supervising the sale of alcohol carries great responsibility. Alcohol-related accidents, injuries, and
deaths can occur if it is sold irresponsibly. The following can occur if you allow liquor laws to be
violated:
• You can be disciplined, up to and including losing your job at Walgreens.
• The manager and the emp►oyee selling the alcohol can be arrested, charged, and perhaps
jailed and fined.
• You may not be able to work in or own another establishment that sells liquor.
• Walgreens may tose its liquor license and/or be fined.
• The manager, the employee selting the alcohol, and Walgreens can be sued for damages
caused by an intoxicated person if we sold alcohol to that person illegally.
Tobacco
It is against the law to sell cigarettes or other tobacco products to anyone under the age of 18
(Note: In some states, the minimum age is 19). Walgreens policy also requires employees
to request proper identi�cation of any customer that looks younger than 27,years old. If
tobacco products are sold illegally, you and your employees selling tobacco can be arrested,
charged, and perhaps jailed and fined.
Some state and/or local laws place additional restrictions on the sale of tobacco products, e.g.
prohibit or otherwise restrict the self-service sale of tobacco products, or require clerks to be
18 years of age or older to sell tobacco products. Therefore, it is important that management
investigate and determine whether any such local laws apply to your store.
Inform all new employees, regardless of age, of the legal age for the buying and selling on alcoholic
beverages and tobacco products.
For employees who will be selling alcoholic beverages, have the employees:
• Review all available training materials, such as the Liquor Department Manual.
', of 2 09/27/2000 7:40 AM
Sale oflt�lcohblic Beverhges and Tobacco Products
http://walnet.walgreens.com/hrdev/b...ping/Legalissues/alcoholtobacco.htm
� View the liquor videotape.
• After the empioyee has viewed the liquor videotape, write the date the employee viewed the
tape as well as the name of the tape on the Employee's Training Record (Form 240). Have
the employee sign the Training Record in the Employee Signature Column.
• Have the employee read, sign, and date the Sale of Alcoholic Beverages/Tobacco Products
Policv. Management must also sign this form and send the completed form to the district
office.
The Alcoholic Beverages Daily Lo4 is provided to help reinforce Company policy and state law
regarding the sale of alcoholic beverages. Each day, before selling alcoholic beverages, the
employees who sell the products must:
Read the statement on the log;
Sign the log, indicating he/she understands the statement;
Enter the date and the time.
Review the Company Policy and state law with any employee before authorizing that employee to
sell alcoholic beverages and/or tobacco products.
Every three months, management must review Company policy regarding the selling of alcoholic
beverages and/or tobacco products with employees. The review must include:
Stating the legal age required for purchasing alcoholic beverages and tobacco products in
your state;
Informing the employees that they must ask for a driver's license from youthful-appearing
customers as proof of age and if the license appears valid, but there is still doubt about the
age, to refuse the sale;
Inform employees that if they sell alcoholic beverages and/or tobacco products to a customer
who is under the legal age to purchase the product, the employee is subject to arrest and
criminal prosecution and the customer is subject to arrest.
The liquor sign is to be posted at the entrance to the liquor department. Place the sign on a 10 X
14 bulletin stand or hang it in a place that can be easily seen by customers.
The sign can be ordered from "Order.It" on StoreNet. The 10 X 14 bulletin stand can be ordered
form the Corporate Purchasing Department in Deerfield.
The liquor calendar is to be posted on the counter or wall by the main register in the Liquor
Department. This calendar is used as a quick reference to determine if the customer is of legal age
to purchase alcoholic beverages.
Be sure to change the calendar daily to assure accuracy when checking birth dates on customer
IDs. The calendar can be ordered form Order.It on StoreNet.
• Sale of Alcoholic Beverages Daily Log lForm 264�
• Sale of Alcoholic Beverages/Tobacco Policy�Form 265�
2 of 2 09/27/Z000 7:40 AM
Form 265
[*�!_�� '-i�� .
SALE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES/TOBACCO PRODUCTS POLICY
(Store Stamp)
Please read the following statements concerning Company Policy and the sale of alcoholic beverages/tobacco
products. If you have any questions, review them with your manager before signing.
• If the customer is under 21 years of age, I will not sell him/her alcoholic beverages.
• If the customer is under years of age, I will not sell him/her tobacco products.
(fill in legal age)
- If the customer is youthful appearing, I will demand at least a driver's license for proof of age.
• If I doubt the age of the customer, regardless of the amount of proof of age shown, I MUST refuse
the sale.
• If I sell alcoholic beverages/tobacco products to a customer who is under the legal age, I am responsible
and will be subject to arrest and criminal prosecution.
• tf I sell alcoholic beverages/tobacco products to a customer who is under the legal age, the customer is
subject to arrest.
I have been counseled on and fully understand the above Company Policy conceming the sale of alcoholic
beverages/tobacco products.
Employee Signature Date
Manager Signature
Date
Send this completed form to your District Of6ce. Retain at the District Otfice for one year.
t .
�
�
Z3A
�
a
0
U
C�
G�i
.a
O
'�
C
�
0
.0
�
C,%
�
GA
C
.,..�
TC^�
Vi
�
W
�
Q
a
U
a
O
.--�
I
•Y
.fl
.�
�
O
a.
�
a�
�
�--� N N M M
� �
� v
.., � x
� o
o�io � �
Q�' U �
cn � c.
: � � �
N N
� � N O
c�d O . �% �
� l� U =
� U a� a� °'
� � � �
�� Y �
� � ..4—a-, �' c�
bA
O � . O�A d�Q b�A
� �`�'� � -� �
3 j Q Q c�
r
Q
�1.�
�
Q
�,
�
�
e
N �
+�'.+ �
bU aj
� �
c�
U �
3 �
� O
O �
U O
cd �
� �
� �
� �
.� �
3 0
��
• � °�
:-.. �
.,
.�
O aj
o, �
� U�,
�
O�. o �
N
+r � �
� F' �
0
`� Q o
��>,
� :�? �
� > �t
ir
�
O
�
�
D
v
6�
�
�r.r
O
U
U
CC
�
O
ir
O
O
.C:
0
�
�
w
0
G�
C�
�
�
�
�
�
�
w
6�
L
'�
�
0
�
�
�
0
�
N
>
a�
.�
bA �
� �
t. �
N
> �
N �
�
,� �
�
a�i O O
C�
� •--� �
'� � O
� w �
� � �
� 4, �+.
� O O
�� �
�. �,
� >, �,
.� � �
� N �
" a i
� � cd �
� � � �.�-
� � •
.
�
^� �iN ,.,
U
�� �
'Z3 �`� .� ;r.� `�
� R 1��s��
•.. o _.-4
� �
y O ✓ _
� �
N '" �`R=`�•,,s _ ,
'� p u--- � � F �
O O ,� � �`
�
+.. v ,��r.� ��
� C3 . -:.�� `��
?,'a O
O w
q ." �
�
Q � � � i,
ti •� ti '� o °' a�
� � � � � o N
� � � � �..�.., � � ai
�0 � � � � � � «S
��� 3�,x ° �
� � � � �
[� �s �, � o �j . � o
� � � �
E"� U s'" �' �
O � N � � �
Z �Qb�
N
.L
�
Q t"
� �
'd �
� �
> °�
� �
O
� �
�+�M �
p O .-.
� �+ O
� � �
� � O
� � �
.� �+ cd
Q � U
�.
� �
� A a,
� � o
���
N � �]„
� � �
" �' �
���
� � 3
O '� I�
�, � N
� � O
°o '�' °'
� � �
N
N
C�
�
O
.-C
O
U
cd
�.
�°
..�
�
a�
,-+
c�
�
�x
0
�
�
�
�
O
.;
,�
0
�
�
�
O
�
�
a>
a,
�N^
�-�!
cd
t.
N
'�
�
�
�
c.
�
O
U
v
c�
.�
O
�
0
0
�
O
U
�
>,
�
.�
0
�
�
�
r1.
�
d
�
c�
t.
� O
�
O �
� �
o �
o �
�
O
U �
c� �
� U
� �
�
0
� �
b�A �
� O
� �
� >-, �-.
� � ��;
O � N
� � �
a. � �°
�
� � �
� w �
� � •�
� � U
� � �
� � �
cd
bU
� �
�
� � .
4-� � �
� � �
v� y
'" .b
�
� � bA
Q�
� O �
dp cn .�,z".
� � �.
� N 44�
�
4� a" c�A
� .-.+ Z,,,"'
c�
p 0 �
O U O
� o >,
� �
° �3 �3
�.
O � �
� .� „�
� �U
�. �i
0 0 � �
� �"' G-, y
� O �
� �
d � .� >°,
..�..
i.
�
0
� �
U �
N �
� �
+... �
� �
�,� %�
O
��
Ct3
o �
C ai
� �
� �
> '"
w
� �°
O �
� o
� `�
oA
� ��
� �
.r'
� �
� �.
. . . . . .
.--�
cd
bA
�
a
0
U
U
�
..O
O
F-'
'L�
�
O
.s�
O
U
OO
.�
�
ai
�
� �
a�
� �
� > �
� ' �:. -
j.. � .S ;
> .� �
� � o
«i 4� �
� � V
O Q �
O i�.. O�
-54 � s,�.,
� � �
� � O
�
Q� �
� � �
�.�3
�3 �
� � �
� � �
N Q w y,,;
Oy"'' -� c*"'
� � o �
�
U �
� � � .�
� � .�
�-+
� �� � �
� .�
o � � �
�, � V W
� � '
�
�
�
�
U
�
�.
O
i-�
�
'CJ
O C�
� �
O +-+
�
N �
�
,� . �
� o
� �
� �
O �p
� �
� �
U
� O
E-+ �
� O
��
�b
� �
c�
w
� Q
+-�+ O
CQ U
A �
OA
C
.�
�
a�
�
�
�.
0
�
s.,
�
�1.
�
�
� �
h �
MN vUj
W �
I �
'�
.O �
� �
y �
� �
'C7
U O
� �
a.�
C �
c� �
y U
O �.S�'
a�
�
�
c�
�
�
. ,..,
.�..
'b
�
c�
�
N
bA
�
O
0
�
.,.�.
�
�
�
N
U
.�
N
.0
E-''
1
�
� �
'Li c�
b
O �
� o
i..l C�
•C�.
" f�.
W N
�,
O
N
� � � N
� .d . -- �,
o � ,�
� � Q �
� � � �
� � v� O
•� O � O
.� � '� O
N '" � V tN-.
N
� � c�"i� .��' �
� � � O •..
� � > O �'
cCS N �U � �
': �
O 0 � ¢, O�U
� � �
� v� �. v�i �
.�4 y O , �
� � ,� o �.
�t"' � �.4: O
C. s"-�. � :� N
�c� v� k �
�-' Q„ � "C3
��.,, ,.°'�., °� °' o
�..i .�
� � U O �
� � � � �
� � O � �
� � � � �
' e.. O
W � '� � �
.
�
,.0 � .�,C
o � 3
�.� �
•--' 3..
N �
�
o��.�
s. O � v�i
�"" �.L'
O � � r"'
U � � �
� -d cr.�
� � � i�'
� � � �
� � � �
cd �
b c�C � O
� � -� �
.ii � � ..�
� � �+ �
�
>°, v� � �'
O
N �' � �
� � y �
N �' .L:
��� a�
.� � `° �
a> � � '.�
(�
� � O �
O b � O
�� �
� � U G,"
0
3�0�
O �%"' '�
c
0
Y A
t X
U W
° m
0
c �
�°A
o ° n
� a
o � R
n�!�
� m
a ° oE tl°
or�
U a u
� m
t
�
m o
o �'
a � a e
V � m
m
t
. `
0
a W
r a
� o
: °
; c
r �
m 'o
O q
:
ay
u A
Y �
Q M
_ m
� A
S�
r
°a
0
»t
�
U p
m
�r
Y �
< a
N
�
�
�
N
a
0
U
U
c�
.D
O
N
'C!
�
O
�
O
�
04
�
�
O
.�
�
.x
0
C".
�
O
�
GO
.�
.�
�
.;
bA
�
O
w
N
�
�
w
�
O
O
a
dA
�
:�
�
��+
G
L.
O
dA
�
.�
N
bq
�
�
�
•
�
�
�
c�''�f
t1.
�
U
N
v
�
�
'C7
N
�
N
d
•
"Cy
N
�
.�
ccS
ca
O
�
'b
�"'
a>
w
�
�,
�
>
O
•
�
O
�
�
.a
�
�
O
'�
�
0
�
•
�
�
a�
�
.�
O
�.
Q
•
�
OA
�
�
U
f1.
�
�
�
�
U
.�
'li
�
�
�
�
O
C.0
�
'U
�
�
�
�
U
Q
•
GC
.�
�
W
�
�
�
j--�
.-=.
c�
�
�
c�
U
'C3
�
�
�
�
�
s�.,
�
.�
GG
4--�
�
�
�
s.,
�
t.
�
O
�
�
U
�
�
0
4� i
O
U
U
c�
.D
O
t.
O
O
�
O
U
�
a�
�
� �
� �
a� �
r.� a
0
U
U
�
.i]
O
s-�
O
O
�
O
U
tti
N
�
�
�
a�
�
0
N
�
N
�
N
�
�
.�
O
.�
�
O
f1.
�
�
�-�"+ '�
�
O v
v� . ,..
� �
� �
c�, �
O �
N �
O "�
�, O
�. �
� �
bA y�
c� �
c"" i�.
� �
� �
� �
O
�
� �
V �
O O O O
N
.�. �
�-. O
� �
� ,�
��
U '�"
� �
�, �
� U
� �
'b prp
� �
3 �
�d '�.
�
N �
� '
C.' �
� �
�y O
� U
� � �
bA .^� N
�
� �.�
� b
� o �
� U
N �
� O �
o � �
� o �
� �, v
V O OA
.� O �
�"' U rcd
`-�. c� G
M
�
t�
bA
N
a
0
U
U
c�
�
O
H
'�
�
O
�
O
U
d
�
N
�
- __,`�,
—. -;
G-��
`=_�--`:�''
••
TEST
o—
Supervising Liquor and Tobacco Sales
The goal of this training is to help prevent the illegal sale of liquor, cigarettes
and other tobacco products.
To test your understanding, you`}1 read realistic situations involving the sale of
liquor and tobacco. You71 be asked how to handle the situations according to
company policy and the law.
This Is Important Supervising the sale of alcohol cames great responsibility. Alcohol-related
To You Because ... accidents, injuries, and deaths can occur if alcohol is sold irres�onsib}� The
following can occur if you allow liquor laws to be violated:
• You can be disciplined, up to and including losing your job at Walgreens.
• You and the employee selling the alcohol can be arrested, charged, and
perhaps jailed and fined.
• You may not be able to work in or own another establishment that sells
liquor.
• Walgreens may lose its liquor license and/or be fined.
• You, the employee selling the alcohol, and Walgreens can be sued for
damages caused by an intoxicated person ifwe sold alcohol to that person
illegally_
Supervising the sale of tobacco products also carries great responsibility. It's
against the law to sel) cigarettes or other tobacco products to anyone under the
age of I 8. Federal Law also reguires retailers to request proper
identification of anyone under the age of 27. If tobacco products are sold
illegally, you and your employees selling tobacco can be arrested, charged,
and perhaps jailed and fined.
Some state and/or local laws place additional restrictions on the sale of
tobacco products, e.g. prohibit or otherwise restrict the self-service sale of
tobacco products, or require clerks to be 18 years of age or older to sell
tobacco products. Therefore, it is important that you investigate and
determine whether any such local laws apply to your store.
03l2000
� " E��EL.�
It's the Law It's your responsibility to be sure no one in your store violates the following
laws and company policies:
Customers must:
Be at least 21 years of age to purchase liquor.
Be at least l 8 to purchase cigarettes and other tobacco products.
Clerks must:
Be at least 2l years old to sell liquor in stores that have a separate liquor
department (regardless of state law).
Be of legal age as defined by state law and/or local ordinances in stores that
DO NOT have a separate liquor department. (Check with your store
manager for these guidelines.)
Ask each youthful appearing customer who is buying liquor or tobacco for a
valid driver's license to ensure the customer is of legal age.
NOTE: For tobacco sales, Federal Law requires proper identification from
any customer that looks younger than 27 years old.
Review company policy and state laws with a member of management before
being authorized to sell liquor.
Be informed that they are subject to arrest and criminal prosecution if they
sell liquor or tobacco illegally.
Read and sign the Alcoholic Beverages/Tobacco Products Policy (Form 265)
when hired. (See CM-1 Tab 7 Section 50)
NOTE: Some states require an additional state form for the Sale of
Tobacco products. These forms must also be signed by the
employee and kept on permanent file at the store. To date this
applies to the following states:
Kentucky
Texas
Read and sign the Alcoholic Beverages Daily Log (Form 264) EVERY
DAY. (See CM-1 Tab 7 Section 50)
Refuse the sale if:
• customer appears underage;
• customer's identification appears to be invalid;
• customer appears to be purchasing the liquor or tobacco for someone else
who is underage;
• customer is attempting to buy alcohol before ar after the legal hours of
sale; or
• customer appears intoxicated (liquor sales only).
03/2000
Supervising Liquor and Tobacco Sales
Back Up Your Employees
Your employees may need your help with respect to liquor and/or tobacco
sales. Be sure to let them know it's OK to give you a call if they ever need
help refusing a sale_
They may also want to cal) you simply to get a second opinion about the
validity of a driver's license or someone's age. After all, the clerks are also at
risk of losing their jobs, being sued, arrested and/or criminally prosecuted if
they sell illegally.
How to Refuse a Sale
Normally, we want to do all we can to make a customer happy. But if that
means selling liquor or tobacco illegally, we CAN'T make the customer
happy. It's important then, to refuse the sale but still try to let our customers
know we care about them and appreciate their business.
When approaching a customer to refuse a sale, it may help to follow these
steps:
1. Stand off to the side of the counter and line of customers when talking to
the customer. This allows some privacy and lets your cashier continue
with business while you ta]k.
Simply ask the customer, "May I help you with something?" This type of
question makes no assumptions and lets the customer explain the
situation.
3. State the law that explains why you can't sell the liquor or tobacco to the
customer. (e.g. "The law doesn't allow us to sell liquor to someone who
may be intoxicated." or "By law, I can't sell cigarettes to someone I
believe to be under the age of 18.")
�� Avoid making disparaging statements about the
customer. (e.g. "You're too drunk to have any more
liquor.")
4. If the customer is intoxicated and appears to pose no threat to employees
or other customers, offer to make a phone call to a friend or relative or to
arrange for the customer to get home safely.
5. If a customer gets hostile or aggressive, politely ask the customer to leave
the store. If necessary, warn that you'll call the police if the person doesn't
leave. If the aggression continues, call the police. Never endanger
yourself, other employees or customers or the hostile person.
03/2000
F.J�fEL.�
Special Laws Ask yovr manager if your state, county or town has any special liquor or
tobacco laws. (For example, special days or times of the day that alcohol
cannot be sold, self-service restrictions for tobacco, etc.) Write them below:
4
', Some states require an additional state form for the Sa[e of Tobacco
products. These forms must be signed by the employee and kept on
permanent file at the store. Ask your store manager for specific details. To
date this applies to the following states:
Kentucky
Texas
Directions: Review each of the following situations. Decide how to
sxiLi
handle the situation. Circle the letter of the correct answer.
BUILDING
EXERCISE
1. Caroline, the liquor clerk, has paged you on the red line. She says there's a couple in the
liquor department creating a disturbance. When you arrive, the man and woman are
speaking very loudly and slurring their speech. They both smell heavily of alcohol and
the man is yetling at Caroline. There's a long line of customers behind the couple.
What's the rrst thing you should do?
A. Discreetly call the police since you anticipate that the situation will escalate into a
full-blown disturbance.
B. Open another cash register and ring customers while Caroline deals with the couple.
Give her feedback after they leave, explaining how she handled the situation and tips
for dealing with similar predicaments in the future.
C. Step to the side of the cash register and say to the man, "Sir, may I help you over
here?" Motion for Caroline to start processing the purchases of the other customers
who are waiting.
D. Take the couple aside and calmly explain that since they're obviously intoxicated, it
would be in their best interest to leave the store. Ask if there is someone you can call
to drive them home or if they'd like you to call a taxi.
,1 i L►•ZIZIZI7
03/2000
Supervising Liquor and Tobacco Sales
2. Jody, the cosmetician, is covering the liquor department register while the liquor clerk
takes a meal break. You're in the liquor department checking in a delivery when a large
group of teenagers comes in. They're with a young man who appears slightly otder than
they are. The entire group goes to the back cooler and discusses which is the best beer.
The teenagers give their money to the older man, and they stay in the back of the store
while he goes to the front register.
Jody greets the man at the checkout counter and asks for some identification. The man
hands her his driver's license which shows he is 21 years old. Jody begins to ring up the
sale. You should:
A. Do nothing. Afier all, the ID is valid. You have no proof of wrongdoing_
B. Interrupt the sale and tell the customer that you cannot sell the liquor to him,
explaining that policy requires you to refuse any sale where it appears that a customer
may be buying alcohol for others who are underage.
C. Let Jody finish the sa1e. (You don't want to embarrass her in front of customers.)
Later tell her that you believe the liquor was intended for the underage group back by
the cooler.
The liquor clerk, Ms. Sanders, calls you up to the liquor register. There's a customer at
the counter who appears very young (under 21). She has a valid driver's license that
states she's 46 years old. Ms. Sanders has asked the customer a few questions such as,
"What's your address? Your birthday? Your social security number?" The information
the woman has given matches the driver's license. But because of the customer's youthful
appearance, Ms. Sanders still isn't sure she should make the sale_ You should:
A. Thank Ms. Sanders for double checking with you and approve the sale. You are
covered legally since the cvstomer has a driver's license, and it isn't good customer
service to ask more questions.
B. Ask the customer to sign her name. Check to see if it matches the signature on the
driver's license. Or, ask for a second piece of identification.
C. Tell Ms. Sanders to refuse the sale since the customer appears underage.
4. Antonio, the front cashier, calls for management assistance. When you arrive on the
scene, you find Antonio in a heated discussion with a young man you estimate to be
about 13 or 14. The customer insists he's supposed to buy a carton of Camel no-filter
cigarettes for his mother who's home with the flu. He has a note from her to "prove it."
Antonio is explaining the policy against selling cigarettes to anyone under 18. The
youthful customer repeatedly contends that, since they aren't for him, but for his mother,
he should be allowed to buy them. "Besides," he adds, "my family shops at Walgreens
all of the time. If you make my mom get out of bed to buy cigarettes, she certainly won't
come here to get them - now or ever again!" You should:
A. Take the young customer aside and warn him gently about the health risks of
smoking. Encourage him to break this dangerous habit before it's too late. Tell him
you won't get him into any trouble.
B. Thank him for his family's regular business, but explain that it would be illega) for
Antonio to sell him the cigarettes.
C. Offer to call his mother for confirmation, then sell him the Camels only if she says
it's OK.
F��EL.�
Answers to Skill Building Exercise
1. Don't call the police until you've decided that the problem can't be solved at
the store level. Don't leave Caroline to fend for herself either_ You need to
back up your employees by taking care of potentially abusive situations
personally. It's embarrassing to the customer for you to automatically assume
that he or she is drvnk, as in answer D. The most tactful way to handle the
problem is to handle it privately. With that in mind, C is the best response.
2. Although you normally would not want to embarrass Jody by correcting her in
front of other customers, B is your only choice in this situation. If you
allow Jody to make the sale (A and C), you are breaking the law and risking
arrest, conviction, jail, and fines for both Jody and yourself.
3. If there is any doubt in Ms. Sanders' mind about the legality of selling alcohol
to a customer, you should support her decision. The best way to handle this
situation is C_
4. Although your personal concern for a customer's health is admirable, it's not
appropriate in this instance. Even if you call the young man's mother and she
tells you it's OK, it would still be illegal to sell him cigarettes. B is the most
gracious and only legal way to resolve this problem.
If you had problems with any of the practice exercise situations, review the
company policies and laws on pages 2-4. Re-read the information until you
understand why the correct answer was chosen. Ask your manager for help if
necessary.
Supervising Liquor and Tobacco Sales will be tested at the end of this section.
When you have completed atl of the units in this section you may take the on-
line test for "Area 3 Section B— Shopping Environment." See the directions
at the end of this section.
6 03/2000
W���
Trade and Corporate Retations
DATE: June 12, 2000
SUBJECT: Sale to Minors
TO: District Managers
FROM: J. B. Karlin - Executive Vice President, Store Operations
The selling of alcoholic beverages to anyone under 21 years of age or the selling
of tobacco products to anyone under 18 are serious offenses. A violation can
jeopardize the store's liquor/tobacco license, and, in some instances, result in a
citation being issued to the employee, individually.
Due to the seriousness of these sale to minor issues, I am asking you to
personallX discuss this subject with everv manager and sales clerk who retails
alcoholic beverages and/or tobacco products in your district. Every employee
must be informed that selling either alcoholic beverages or tobacco products to
an underage customer subjects the employee to the possibility of charges being
filed against him/her personally by local authorities, and also disciplinary action
by Walgreens, up to and including termination. Such violations also subject the
store to fines, and possibly, the suspension or revocation of the store's liquor or
tobacco license.
As you know, it is Walgreen company policy to request photo identification from
any person under 27 years of age who attempts to buy cigarettes or other
tobacco products. This additional requirement must be discussed with your
employees who retail tobacco products.
All employees involved in the sale of alcoholic beverages or tobacco
products are to read and sign the attached statement, and the store
manager shall add his/her signature as witness. This statement shall then
be returned to the Trade and Corporate Relations Department, MS #2255.
This should be an "eyeball to eyeball" discussion on your regular trips to the
stores. It should not be replaced by a letter or phone catl.
I appreciate your usual cooperation in carrying out this directive. Thank you.
cc: Vice Presidents - Store Operations
J. A. Oettinger
RRD/rc
G:Shared/Njp/Quarterty Sale To Minor Karlin Memo.Doc
� �.• z- �-- � �t`-,�` �`'t 1
�" � ��; , ��c.-� °t-�tis
� ���
Lc� � }- �� �,�,�.
QUIZ ON CIGARETTE SALES
1. HOW OLD DOES A PERSON NEED TO BE TO BUY CIGARETTES
A. 16
B. 17
C. 18
D. NONE OF THE ABOVE
2. IS THIS PERSON OLD ENOUGH TO BUY CIGARETTES IF TI�IR DRIVERS LIC. SAYS D.O.B.
1/31/1983.
A. YES
B. NO
3. IS THIS PERSON OLD ENOUGH TO BUY CIGARETTES IF 'Tf�IR DRIVERS LIC. SAYS D.O.B.
12/12/1983.
A. YES
B. NO
4. IF A PERSON SAYS THAT Tf�YLOST TI�IR I.D. BUT ARE OF AGE AND LOOK OF AGE DO YOU
SELL 'THEM TI-IE CIGARETTES.
A. YES
B. NO
5. IF A PERSON THAT IS OF AGE(BECAUSE YOU SAW TI�IIt I.D. AND THEY WERE OLD ENOUGI�
BUYS CIGARETTESAND 'TI�N GIVES TF�M TO SOMEONE ELSE THAT IS NOT OF AGE. HAVE YOU
FOLLOWED PROPER PROCEDURES.
A. YES
B. NO
6. IF A PERSON BRINGS YOU A NOTE FROM A PARENT SAYING TI�Y ARE ALLOWED TO BUY
CIGARETTES FOR'THEM, DO YOU SELL T'I�M TI� CIGARETTES.(KNOWING THAT THIS PERSON IS
NOT OF AGE)
A. YES
B. NO
7. IF A PERSON TELLS YOU THAT TI�Y WII.L GIVE YOU MONEY TO SELL TI�M CIGARETTES
WHEN YOU KNOW 'THEY ARE NOT OF AGE. DO YOU SELL 'TI�M THE TO THAT PERSON.
A.YES
B. NO
8. IF A PEROSN SAYS TF�Y LEFT TI�IR I.D. IN TF� CAR AND WII.L GET IT AFTER YOU SELL TI-�M
Tf� CIGARETTES SHOULD YOU SELL THAT PERSON TF� CIGARETTES.
A. YES
B. NO
9. HOW OLD IN YOUR MIND DOES A PERSON NEED TO BE TO BUY CIGARETTES(ALSO COMPANY
POLICY AND STATE LAV�, WITHOUT SHOWING I.D.
A. 18
B20
C.25
D.27
lO.WHAT CLASSIFIES AS AN I.D. WE CAN TAKE TO SELL CIGARETTES.
A. I.D. WITH BIRTHDATE BUT NO PHOTO
B. I.D. WITH PHOTO BUT NO BIT�IDATE
C. I.D. WITH PICTURE AND BIRTHDATE
D. ALL OF 'TI� ABOVE
11. IF A PERSON GIVES YOU A TEMPORARY I.D. (PAPER COPI� DO YOU ACCEPT IT TO SELL
CIGARETTES.
A. YEA
B. NO
12 .WHAT 3 WORDS MUST YOU WRITE ON TI� BOTTOM OF YOUR CHECKOUT FORM BEFORE YOU
CAN TAKE A CASH DRAWER AND START WORK.
A. I WII.,L SELL
B. I WII.,L WORK
C I WII.L CARD
D. I DON'T KNOW
13. Tf� CUSTOMER LINE IS BUII..DING AT YOU CHECKOUT AND YOU HAVE A PERSON THAT IS
QUESTIONABLE ABOUT BEING OLD ENOUGH TO BUY CIGARETTES . WHAT SHOULD YOU DO?
A. CALL FOR ADDITIONAL HELP(I SEE 3) AND CARD TI� PERON
B. SELL 'TI� CIGARETTES WITHOUT CARDING
C. DO NOTHING AND KEEP RINGING BUT DONT SELL TI� CIGARETTES.
D. ASK THE PERSON TO STEP ASIDE UNTIL YOU GOT TI� LINE DOWN AND HAD TIlVIE TO CARD.
FYI- TI� FINE FOR SELLING CIGARETTES TO A NIINOR IS $250.00 THAT YOU PAY .(NOT TI�
STORE), AND YOU WILL ALSO BE GIVEN A WRITTEN DISPLINARY FROM THE MANAGER.. SELLING
CIGARETTES A SECOND TIME TO A NIINOR IS A$500.00 FINE AND TERNIINATION FROM YOUR JOB.
PLEASE FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THE CARDING OF CIGARETTES SALES AND IF YOU HAVE ANY
FURTT�R QUESTIONS PLEASE ASK MANAGEMENT.
W ��.�J�`��r.i. .
� Store #
Trade and Corporate Relations
Address:
DATE: City & Sfate_
SUBJECT: COMPANY POLICY REGARDING THE SALE OF ALCOHOUC
BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS
FROM: J. B. Karlin - Executive Vice President, Store Operations
TO: All Store Managers/Employees
IMPORTANT
Liquor, beer, or wine may not be sold to, or by, anyone under the age
of 21.
2. Cigarettes or other tobacco products may not be sold to anyone under
the age of 18. In addition, in certain municipafities, cferks selling
tobacco products must be at least 18 years of age -- so know the
legal age requirements in your community.
3. With respect to the sale of both alcoholic beverages and tobacco
products, at least a driver's license must be demanded of any youfhful
appearing customers. Further, pursuant to company policy, photo
identification must be required of anyone attempting to buy tobacco
products who is under 27 years of age. Request photo identification
of all persons who appear to be under the required age and refuse the
sale if it is not provided_
4. Regardless of the amount of proof of age shown, if the seller doubts
the age of the customer, he/she must refuse the sale.
A CLERK WHO SELLS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES OR TOBACCO
PRODUCTS TO ANYONE UNDER THE LEGAL AGE TO PURCHASE THESE
PRODUCTS IS SUBJECT TO ARREST AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION AS
WELL AS DISCIPLINARY ACTION UP TO AND INCLUDING TERMINATION.
STATEMENT:
! have read Walgreens' company policy regarding the sale of aicoholic beverages and tobacco
products. I thoroughly understand that the sale of alcoholic beverages and/or tobacco products to
underage cusiomers is a serious offense, which can affect my personal livelihood and that of my
fellow employees. I also understand that I must request photo identification of any customer who
appears to be underage, and in the case of tobacco products, anyone under the age of 27, and I wil!
refuse sale to anyone who fails to provide proper I.D.
Furthermore, I agree to comply with the law and follow the policies that have been set by Walgreen
Co. regarding the sale of alcoholic beverages and tobacco products, and understand that any
violation of these policies will result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination.
CLERK'S SIGNATURE DATE CLERK'S SIGNATURE DATE
STATEMENT: I f�ave witnessed the signature of every employee who is involved in the sale of
alcoholic beverages or tobacco products in my store.
STORE MANAGER: DATE:
" Note: (f additional space is needed for signatures, please make a copy of this page.
GISkAREDtROSE1ROSE'SF-180BWlC8TOB 1.DOC
� �_
� � �� i .
Corporate and Requlatory Law
DATE: October 24, 2000
WALGREENS #4697
6525 UNIV. AV. NE
FRIDLEY, MN. 55432
District #:�
SUBJECT: COMPANY POLICY REGARDING THE SALE OF ALC
BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO PRODUCTS
FROM:
J. B. Karlin - Executive Vice President, Store Operations
TO: All Store Managers/Employees
IMPORTANT
1. Liquor, beer, or wine may not be sold to, or by, anyone under the age
of 21.
2. Cigarettes or other tobacco products may not be sold to anyone under
the age of 18. In addition, in certain municipalities, clerks selling
tobacco products must be at least 18 years of age — so know the
legal age requirements in your community.
3. With respect to the sale of both alcoholic beverages and tobacco
products, at least a driver's license must be demanded of any youthful
appearing customers. Further, pursuant to company policy, photo
identification must be required of anyone attempting to buy tobacco
products who is under 27 years of age. Request photo identification
of all persons who appear to be under the required age and refuse the
sale if it is not provided.
4. Regardless of the amount of proof of age shown, if the seller doubts
the age of the customer, he/she must refuse the sale.
, ,� „
r ,? �
1�
/L�
! �.
�
A CLERK WHO SELLS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES OR TOBACCO
PRODUCTS TO ANYONE UNDER THE LEGAL AGE TO PURCHASE THESE
PRODUCTS IS SUBJECT TO ARREST AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. AS
WELL AS DISCIPLINARY ACTION UP TO AND INCLUDING TERMINATION.
Return Instructions:
All Alcohol and Tobacco Compliance Sheets should be forwarded to your District Office by
November 15, 2000.
All District Managers please attach a District Recap Sheet to the top of your stores Alcohol
and Tobacco Compliance Sheets. Ptease make sure that the stores are arranged in the
order that they appear on the District Recap Sheet. Please forward these immediately to
the following address for Mr. Karlins review:
RE'T[JRN TO DISTRICT OFFICE
BY 11/24/00
roe,.5�.noc
+�� �
1�
n.�
��; :
, >�
STATEMENT:
I have read Walgreens' company policy regarding the sale of alcoholic beverages and tobacco
products. i thoroughly understand that the sale of alcoholic beverages and/or tobacco products to
underage customers is a serious offense, which can affe�t my personai livelihood and that �f my
feilow employees. I aiso understand that I must request photo identification of any customer who
appears to be underage, and in the case of tobacco products, anyone under the age of 27, and I will
refuse sale to anyone who fails to provide proper I.D.
Furthermore, I agree to comply with the law and follow the policies that have been set by Walgreen
Co. regarding the sale of alcoholic beverages and tobacco products, and understand that any
violation of these policies will result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination.
alcoholic beverages or tobacco products in my store.
!
STORE MANAGER: � C 't- �` �:� ��-`�"��'��-'`DATE: 3 �`' °�� '����
* Note: If additional space i needed for signatures, please make a copy of this page.
G:ISHARED1Kessler12000 NeillReports-conlradsWlC&TOBt.si�.DOC