The URL can be used to link to this page

03/08/2004 - 4603� � 6 � -``� OFFICIAL CIT'Y COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 8, 2004 r � � r r . ♦ : . � � � CffY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 7:30 p.m. - City Council Chambers Attendance Sheet Please �rint name, address and item number vou are interested in. , ,�' �. � � CffY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING �� ;,�5� �' OF MARCH 8, 2004 � 7:30 p.m. City Council Chambers � -�� . �� ` � Attendance Sheet Please �rint name. address and item number vou are interested in. Print Name (Clearlgj Address Item No. _; _--, �,, z �'Ci :�i� � l > � 7l r1/�� - �%�� ,C%/ y -� , � , �;. `:� �,, � i,��. �7 , � -� � . �, + �'- �� ✓�,_tC� ) �-c -�C�� `��L_: i, � ,> �_ - rt � ,. �; °�. ,5 �l � 5'%!i , `;� �--7�c�! ✓� .> '%✓1Ci !� �J ,3_3 G TG� .'/-- —Z D ( , � � � � �G� 1 � � � �Lj_ �i° �� ' `� � / `t e � �;::yE'. r�� .?,. � �� /(, , � %�". � � � � � �� _� � � /,� _ , . , � � � i ._ ✓-' ��,. = %� _" � � � .. . _ �;�G�.. ; _�. U�� -> � a � �'G� �,�%, ,c�e-� �� .,�'�,� � � �� , : �, . ; � d ;�_r,;.�.: „?,, ;� u� � i /� � � =� � � 5 � ► � .<, r�� . 1 ,� . .. : J � / % f; ` �, I � � j`�"' G<' � � �- �'� - % G �� f � � u /�� h � - � �` �� 1 i� �__ � f rt�� C'� ' r -' L >- ; ✓ `-'-;�' i' � ,�/� �, , ,;,�;��w �� .._ � . 7 � � � �: "�,.� f�',LkL� �� m t �� ' � �' , �t.'� a-�,�!'� dr , �' 1 � � -;�� '- � ,' �'G�`-; G/ ., V r � � � CffY OF FRIDLEY FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 7:30 p.m. - Citp Council Chambers Attendance Sheet Please nrint name. address and item number vou are interested in � � . -� � _ C7T1f OF FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 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 y' p a r t i c i p a t e i n a n y o f F ri dle y's services, pro g rams, and activities. Hearing impaired persons who need an r� _ i n t e r p r e t e r o r o t h e r p e r s o n s with disabilities who re quire aw�iliary aids should contact Ro berta Co ins a t 572-3500 at least one week in advance. (TTD/572-3534) 1 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of February 9, 2004 OLD BUSINESS: 1. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Fridley City Code, Chapter 11, Fees ....... 1- 15 ........................................................... 2. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 402, Water and Sewer Administration ofthe Fridley City Code ..................................................................................... 16 - 31 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8 2004 PAGE 2 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: OLD BUSINESS (CONTINUEDI• 3. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 206, Building Code, Adopting the 2001 Minnesota State Building Code and Approve Official Title and Summary Ordinance ................................................ NEW BUSINESS: 32-53 4. Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of February 18, 2004 ............................................................................ 54 - 77 5. Receive the Minutes of the Appeals Commission Meeting of February 25, 2004 ............................................................................ 78 - 84 6. Resolution Scheduling a Public Hearing for March 29, 2004, to Amend Section 7.02 of the Fridley City Charter by Ordinance as Recommended by the Charter Commission ................................................. 85 - 88 7. Resolution in Support of an Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit Renewal Application for the Italian American Club Foundation Located at Main Event, 7820 University Avenue N.E. (1Nard 3) .............................................................. 89 - 90 s ' -�`w k rr ,. ,■ I � i � � � � � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 PAGE 3 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 8. Resolution in Support of an Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for Knights of Columbus, 6831 Highway 65 N.E. (1Nard 2) _ ....................................................................................................... 91 92 9. Resolution in Support of an Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for Fridley VFW, Post 363, 1040 Osborne Road N.E. (Ward 2) ..................................................................................................... 93 - 94 10. Resolution Supporting Legislation to Provide Improved Funding Options for City Street Improvements.................................................................................................... 95 - 97 11. Approve Dedication of Street Easement for 69tn AvenueN.E . ....................................................................................................... 98 - 99 4 12. Resolution Authorizing Agreement No. 86310R with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the Replacement of the Traffic Control System on T.H. 47 (University Avenue) at 69t" Avenue .................................................. 100 - 112 - 13. Approve Change Order No. 3 to 2003 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2003 — 1 .............................................................. 113 - 115 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8 2004 PAGE 4 APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 14. Receive Bids and Award Contract for the Sanitary and Storm Sewer Lining Project No. 354 .......... 116 - 119 ............................................................................................. 15. Appointment — City Employee ............................................................................ 120 16. Claims 17. Licenses ...................................................................................................... 121 ....................................................................................................... 122 - 124 ADOPTION OF AGENDA. OPEN FORUM (VfSITORSI: Consideration of Items not on Agenda — 15 Minutes NEW BUSINESS: 18. Special Use Permit Request, SP #04-02, by Kevin and Paulette Holman, to Construct a Detached Garage in the Rear Yard Which is Located in a Flood Fringe District, Generally Located at 571 — 79t" Way N.E. (Ward 3) .......................................................... 125 - 130 _ � �- � _ , � '= FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8. 2004 PAGE 5 � " NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): 19. Variance Request, VAR #04-01, by Kevin and Paulette Holman, to increase the Maximum Size of a First Accessory Structure from 1,000 Square Feet to 1,168 Square Feet, and to Allow an Accessory Structure to Exceed 100% of the First Floor Area of a Dwelling Unit, to Allow the Construction of a 1,168 Square Foot Detached Garage in the Rear Yard, Generally Located at 571 — 79th Way N.E. (Ward 3) ......................................................... 131 - 138 20. Special Use Permit Request, SP #04-01, by Spring Lake Park School District, to use the Property as a Classroom for the Life Skills Program, Generally Located at 7517 Fourth StreetN.E. (1Nard 1) .......................................................................................... 139 - 147 PUBLIC HEARING: 21. Consideration of a Rezoning Request, ZOA #04-01, by John DeMello, Profitmax, Inc., to Rezone Multiple Properties from C-1, Local Business, C-2, General Business, and R-1, Single Family Residential, to S-2, Redevelopment District, for the Purpose of Redevelopment, to Allow for a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex, Generally Located at 1340 and 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 and 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 and 1357 64th Avenue, and Two Vacant Lots, Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition (Ward 2) .......................................................... 148 - 160 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 PAGE 6 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED): - � __ � � � 22. First 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 #04-01, by John DeMello, Profitmax, Inc.) (Ward 2) ..................................................................... 161 - 177 23. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #04-01, by John DeMello, Profitmax, Inc., to Replat Six Parcels into Two Parcels, for the Purpose of Constructing a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex, Generally Located at 1340 and 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 and 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 and 1357 — 64tn Avenue and Two Vacant Lots, Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition (1Nard 2) ........................................................... 178 - 190 24. Informal Status Reports ADJOURN. .................................................................................... 191 0 - K ti -_ - � THE MINUTES OF THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 . I`� I CITY OF FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2004 The regular 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 Billings, Councilmember Wolfe and Councilmember Bolkcom. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. PROCLAMATION: Fridley Lions Club Month — February, 2004 Mayor Lund read a proclamation declaring the month of February, 2004, as Fridley Lions Club Month. He thanked the Lions Club for its years of service. Mr. Craig Gordon, thanked the City Council for the proclamation. PRESENTATION: Heart Safe Community Initiative Ms. Renee Long, Fridley firefighter, said the Fire Department had teamed up with Independent School District 14 in an effort to raise funds to place AEDs on every fire truck and in every school. Councilmember Barnette asked what the program involved. - Ms. Long said sudden cardiac arrest was one of the leading causes of death in the United States. The most effective treatment for cazdiac arrest was electric shock to the heart. The shock was administered by an automated external defibrillator or AED. They were simple, inexpensive and ~ easy to use devices. Defibrillation was only effective if applied quickly, within 3 to 5 minutes. The Heart Safe Community was a program initiated by Allina Medical Transportation. The goal of the Heart Safe Community Initiative was to save lives by increasing access to the AEDs. r Dr. William Burns, City Manager, asked how Allina Medical Transportation was involved. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 2 •_ -` Ms. Long said staff from Allina assisted with the fundraising information and was helping them =- look for grant money. She said the Fire Department was capable of getting Mercy/LTnity Foundation fundraising grants. They had 50 percent matching grants available to any first _ responding agency in Anoka County. The majority of the money would come from fundraising. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how much money they needed to raise. Ms. Long said the cost of each AED was approximately $2,500. Between the schools, the Fire Department and the City buildings, it would cost about $37,000. Ms. Long said donations could be sent to the Fire Department in care of tha Fridley Heart Safe Community Project. StarGazers Program Ms. Mazgaret Leibfried, Principal of the Fridley Middle School, said this was the 2°d annual program and it was a fundraiser for the arts. A short videota.pe was shown. She said it would be a night of celebration, fun and amazing talent in the areas of art, drama and music. Last year they raised $10,000 and all of the money was put into the arts. With that money, they were able to buy costumes for their pop singers, hire an accompanist for their 90 person choir and buy a new potter's wheel for their art class at the high school. Any contribution would be much appreciated. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of January 5, 2004. APPROVED. OLD BUSINESS: l. ORDINANCE NO. 1185 AMENDING CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO S-3, ONAWAY DISTRICT, SCREENING OF SOLID WASTE. Dr. William Burns said this ordinance was an amendment to Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code. It eliminated screening requirements for dumpsters that were accessed by alleys in the Onaway District. Staff recommended Council's approval. WAIVEDTHE READING AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1183 ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION. -_ � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9. 2004 PAGE 3 � � -- � NEW BUSINESS: 2. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FRIDLEY CITY CODE, CHAPTER 3, PERSONNEL. RELATED TO SEVERANCE PAY. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said that Chapter 3 of the Fridley City Code allowed severance pay to employees hired before September 1, 1978. This ordinance clarified that the benefit applied to full-time employees. StafF recommended Council's approval. WAIVED THE READING AND APPROVED THE ORDINANCE ON FIRST , READING. 3. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 107, FIRE DEPARTMENT. OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PERTAINING TO DEPARTMENT OFFICERS. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the ordinance corrected the wording of Chapter 107 of the Fridley City Code by eliminating references to the Deputy Fire Chief and adding references to the Assistant Fire Chief and Fire Marshall. Staff recommended Council's approval. WAIVED THE READING AND APPROVED THE ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING. 4. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 108, FIRE PREVENTION, AND ADOPTING A NEW CHAPTER 108, FIRE PREVENTION, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE MINNESOTA STATE FIRE CODE. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the ordinance adopted the 2003 version of the Sta.te Fire Code. It also added language that allowed Fire Department officials to enforce the law as it related to deliberate or negligent burning, removal or tampering with equipment, fires or barbecues on patios or balconies, and fire access road. Staff recommended Council's approval. WAIVED THE READING AND APPROVED THE ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING. � 5. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A NEW CHAPTER OF THE FRIDLEY CODE PERTAINING TO CLANDESTINE DRUG LAB AND CHEMICAL DUMP SITES. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the ordinance was requested by the Anoka County ° Health Department. It provided definitions, esta.blished notification requirements of the - City and the property owner, identified other responsibilities of the property owner, FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9. 2004 PAGE 4 �-- established property owner responsibilities for costs, provided for recovery of city costs, �_ �- and established an appeal process whereby Council had authority to hear appeals from property owners. Staff recommended Council's approval. _ WAIVED THE READING AND APPROVED THE ORDINANCE ON FIRST READING. 6. VARIANCE EXTENSION REQUEST, VAR #03-14, BY PARIDON COLSTROM, TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK ON A DOUBLE FRONTAGE LOT FROM 34 FEET TO 7 FEET TO RECOGNIZE AN EXISTING NONCON- FORMITY. GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5750 MADISON STREET N.E. � Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said that on July 28, 2003, Council approved a rear yard setback variance for Paridon Colstrom with the condition that a gap in the screening fence along Jefferson Street had to be filled. The condition had not been met within the required six months. Mr. Colstrom asked for a 120-day extension. Staff recommended approval with the understanding that if the gap in the fence was not filled by May 27, 2004, the City would begin the process for removal of the shed which encroached on the setback for the property. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-10 AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR THE 2004 COMMiJNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the application would a11ow the City to provide a series of four public workshops related to the possible amendment of the Housing Chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The workshops would provide an overview of housing trends and housing composition in Fridley, an overview of federal and state law as it related to the City's land use decisions, an examination of the current Housing Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan in light of housing needs in Fridley and the legal constraints the City faced, and a public discussion of the City's role in the provision of affordable housing opportunities. If funded the grant would provide $15,000. Another $15,000 from the City's Section 8 Housing Program balance would be used for this purpose. He said they learned prior to the Council meeting that it was not likely that the Anoka County HR.A would fund tlus program. In any event, staff recommended Council's approval. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. M 8. RESOLUTION NO 2004-11 ORDERING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATES OF COSTS THEREOF: NORTH PARK NEIGHBORHOOD STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2004 —1. I'- ° FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 5 `' _� Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the proposed project would improve Lynde Drive - between Polk Street and Regis Drive, Regis Terrace between Regis Drive and Regis Trail, - Regis Trail from Regis Lane, and the East University Avenue Service Drive between Mississippi Street and 61 St Avenue. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-11. 9. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-12 RECEIVING FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: NORTH PARK NEIGHBORHOOD STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. ST. 2004 —1. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-12. 10. RESOLUTION NO 2004-13 REQUESTING MUNICIPAL STATE AID SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR OTHER LOCAL USE. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-13. 11. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-14 ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: 2004 MISCELLANEOUS CONCRETE REPAIR PROJECT NO. 355. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said the resolution covered the remedial sidewalk, pavement, and curb repair and replacement. Much of the work was due to utility repairs. In 2003, the repairs cost a11 funds $40,407. A similar amount was budgeted in those funds for 2004. Staff recommended Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2004-14. 12. CLAIMS. APPROVED CLAIM NOS. 115146 THROUGH 115319. 13. LICENSES. APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. 14. ESTIMATES. APPROVED THE FOLLOWING ESTIMATE: Hardrives, Inc. 14475 Quiram Drive Rogers, MN 55374-9461 2003 Street Reconstruction: Marion Hills _- Project No. ST. 2003 - 1 Estimate No. 7 $ 3,000.00 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 6 �- -" APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA. Dr. Buxns recommended approval of the consent agenda. Councilmember Bolkcom asked that Item Nos. 6 and 7 be removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda. � ; � MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adopt the proposed consent agenda with the removal of Item Nos. 6 and 7 to the regular 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 with the addition of Item Nos. 6 and 7. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORUM: Ms. Joanne Zmuda, 6051 Fourth Street N.E., and a member of the Concerned Citizens for Fridley, said she had a number of issues to bring before Council. The first issue was zoning. A number of residents mentioned a moratoriuxn on zoning. She asked if it occurred by Council vote or by petition. Profitmax would be before the Planning Commission on February 18, 2004, to try to rezone the area across the street from Sandee's Restaurant. She read the following paragraph from the Plan 2030 of the Metropolitan Council: Once a community adopts its comprehensive plan, state law does not allow it to adopt any zoning ordinance, fiscal device or other official control that conflicts with its comprehensive plan or which permits activity in conflict with metropolitan system plans (Minn. Stat. 473.858; 473.865). Any local zoning ordinance or other local control that conflicts with the community's local comprehensive plan or metropolitan system plans must be brought into conformance with the plan within nine months (Minn. Stat. 473.865). Ms. Zmuda said staff should have to live in Fridley if they were in positions of decision-making. - With respect to cutting City costs, she did not know too much about the Brandes Place project, but thought that maybe that could be put on hold for the time being. The Remodeling Coordinator position was not used very much and it was a paid position. The Recycling Coordinator position was not necessary. The newsletter was very nice, but the ink they used smelled. She asked what it cost the City to publish the newsletter six times per year. She asked why they did not do the newsletter on regular newspaper and in black and white. Ms. Zmuda said with respect to the development near Sandee's, it was stated to residents that it _ would be for people 55 years and older, and a majority of the residents would be from Fridley. _ - i -- r� FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 7 -_- She asked how they were going to keep track. She asked what promises were made by Profitmax _ and how changes would be made after the fact. She asked if there would be a public hearing on _ the 911 fee. If they were trying to attract citizens 55 and older into the area, she did not think it was very friendly Fridley. She said she hoped Council would keep this in mind and pay more attention to their constituents. The Mayor said they would take her comments under advisement. Mr. Donald Anderson, 7304 West Circle N.E., said some of the sidewalks by Fireside Road and Old Central were not plowed. Mr. Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director, said Mr. Anderson was referring to bituminous paths and � per the City's snowplowing policy, only concrete sidewalks were plowed. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they had plowed them in the past. Mr. Haukaas said they had not. NEW BUSINESS: 6. VARIANCE EXTENSION REQUEST, VAR #03-14, BY PARIDON COLSTROM, TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK ON A DOUBLE FRONTAGE LOT FROM 34 FEET TO 7 FEET TO RECOGNIZE AN EXISTING NONCON- FORMITY, GENERALLY LOCATED AT 5750 MADISON STREET N.E. (WARD ,� Councilmember Bolkcom said she was okay with granting the extension, but asked Mr. Colstrom not to request another extension. She said she was going on the record to let him know that he needed to get his property cleaned up and be a good neighbor. Mr. Colstrom said he planned on taking care of everything. MOTION by Councilmember Ann Bolkcom to approve Variance Extension Request, VAR #03-14, by Paridon Colstrom. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-10 AUTHORIZING AN APPLICATION FOR THE 2004 COMMiJNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM. Councilmember Ann Bolkcom asked if staff could report on their meeting with Anoka County. Dr. William Burns, City Manager, said that Grant Fernelius reported that the Anoka County HRA : Technical Advisory committee met on the allocation of the 2004 CDBG money. A total of 61 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 8 '-" applications representing $3.5 million were received. The City's application was not _" recommended. - ' Mr. Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said the Committee selected the items they wanted to fund. Dr. Burns said staff was going to try to do the project with $15,000 they thought they had on hand from a Section 8 surplus. Mr. Hickok said some money was there, and they would make the program work. - Dr. Burns asked if there was a reason to approve the resolution. Mr. Hickok said it solidified what they did and closed the record. Councilmember Bolkcom said the application was for funding for workshops related to affordable housing and life-cycle housing. She asked if there were some other funds for the workshops. Mr. Hickok said what they planned to do was to proceed with the program although the budget would be 50 percent lower. They would try to put together the details on the workshops by the conference meeting in April. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2004-10. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING: 15. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUING AN ON-SALE INTOXICATING LIOUOR LICENSE TO DAVID W. REIMER OF SANDEE'S OF FRIDLEY. L.L.C., DB/A SANDEE'S CAFE, LOCATED AT 6490 CENTRAL AVENUE N.E. (WARD 21. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, said the public hearing was for an on-sale liquor license for Sandee's Cafe, located 6490 Central Avenue N.E. The property was acquired by Town Center Development, LLC. The business would operate as it had in the past. The Public Safety Department reviewed the application and found no reason to deny the request. The applicant was David Reimer, President of Town Center, and a representative was at the meeting if there were any questions. Staff provided a copy of the City ordinance that included the stipulations that went x -_ - � -_ - � --' FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 _ PAGE 9 '� _� along with the license to Mr. Reimer. The ownership change was scheduled to occur on February _ 27. The public hearing notice was published in the Focus on February 5, 2004. The final approval _ of the license was currently scheduled for Februaxy 23, 2004. Councilmember Billings asked if Town Center Development was a limited liability company and said it was a different company than Sandee's of Fridley, LLC. Mr. Richard Whinnery, one of the owners of Town Center Development, agreed. He said Sandee's of Fridley was the new company running the restaurant. They assigned three people who were in Town Center Development. Councilmember Billings asked what kind of experience the three individuals had in the on-sale restaurant business. Mr. Richard Whinnery said they owned the River Inn in Monticello, Minnesota. He said he was in the pizza business for fifteen years, and one of their partners owned two or three restaurants in the Robbinsdale area. They obtained a manager who had been with Applebee's for thirteen years. The assistant manager had been with the River Inn for the last thirteen years. Councilmember Billings said that while it was a separate limited liability company, the principals of Sandee's of Fridley, LLC, were the same as the principals of the organiza.tion that was n,nning the River Inn in Monticello. He asked if Mr. Whinnery was aware of the ordinances that required certain percenta.ges of food and liquor to overall sales. Mr. Whinnery said he was. Councilmember Billings asked if they anticipated having any problems meeting the requirements. Mr. Whinnery said he did not. Councilmember Billings asked what types of changes, other than possible menu changes, they envisioned for the establishxnent. Mr. Whinnery said it would continue as a family restaurant. They would remodel the existing building, do some work on the outside, do some landscaping, tear down the buildings in the back, redo the window and roof azea of the building and make it more presentable. They would be - submitting the plans for that with the plans for the senior complex. Councilmember Billings asked if they were awaze of the requirement that all managers, assistant managers and temporary managers needed to have a manager's license and go through a background check. Mr. Whinnery said he was and thought that had already been submitted. - Councilmember Barnette asked if there was a timetable. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 10 '- Mr. Whinnery said they would continue to operate the restaurant. The remodeling would start in -_ ' mid-suminer. Hopefully, the restaurant would remain open most of the time, but there would be - periods of a week or two when it would have to be shut down. - Ms. Joanne Zmuda, 6051 Fourth Street N.E., asked where the Tamarisk building would be moved. Mr. Whinnery said they had not found a place to move the building to, but there were a few people who were interested in the building. 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 UNANIMOUSLY. NEW BUSINESS: 16. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A NEW CHAPTER OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE SETTING SERVICE CHARGES FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE CALLS. Mr. John Berg, Fire Chief, said this ordinance would establish new fees for emergency response. It was in response to state aid cutbacks. They addressed several areas they felt they could protect their firefighters and recover some of their costs. The areas they identified were motor vehicle accidents, vehicle fires and fires along the railroad right-of-way, grass fires along the trunk highway right-of-way and technical rescue which involved training and specialized equipment, underground pipeline utility breaks, hazardous materials, and fires as a result of negligence. Mayor Lund asked for a brief synopsis of the proposed fees. Mr. Berg said the only fees that were new were the fees for response to motor vehicle accidents. Motor vehicle accidents were probably one of their most dangerous responses and involved a lot of technical training. With the new vehicle safety systems, vehicles had become more dangerous to firefighters, paramedics and police officers. The equipment they used was costly. Vehicle fires had also become more dangerous. The majority of the calls were non-resident. Pipeline utility breaks are required to be reported and they are required to respond. The other items in the ordinance were items they had been billing for under State statutes for a number of years. State statutes allowed them to bill for those types of calls, but the State legislature said it had to be adopted by ordinance and a reasonable fee schedule and a means of billing had to be esta.blished. Councilmember Barnette asked if they had received a response from the insurance companies. Mr. Berg said he had not contacted insurance companies. One of the other fire chiefs in the area did some research and found that there were a number of insurance companies that did cover those _ types of calls. He said there was proposed legislation that would require insurance companies to -_ pay for those things. -_�• FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9. 2004 PAGE 11 -- « Councilmember Bolkcom asked how much it would cost per incident. Mr. Berg said the only two with actual fees would be vehicle accidents and vehicle fires. The fee would be $400. Councilmember Bolkcom said if there were two different motor vehicles involved in an accident, they would share the $400. Mr. Berg said only if they provided a service. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what would happen if her car was on fire and she told them to leave because she did not want to pay the $400. Mr. Berg said that under State statute they had a right to extinguish the fire to protect the public. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what would happen if the car was just smoking. Mr. Berg said it depended on the situation. If it was just steam from the radiator, they probably would help her get off the roadway and then leave. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how many vehicle accidents and vehicle fires they responded to. Mr. Berg said they averaged around 100 motor vehicle accidents every yeaz and responded to 40 vehicle fires every year. Councilmember Bolkcom said that Mr. Berg said that Spring Lake Park, Blaine, Mounds View and Edina have already been doing this for some time. Mr. Berg said that Spring Lake Park, Blaine and Mounds View have been doing it for more than five years. To the best of his knowledge they did not have any issues with it. Councilmember Bolkcom said if someone did not have insurance, they would be billed directly. Mr. Berg agreed. Councilmember Bolkcom asked when the ordinance would go into effect. Mr. Richazd Pribyl, Finance Director, said after the second reading, it would be published, and twelve days after publication, the ordinance would become effective. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there was an appeal process. Mr. Berg said there was not an appeal process written into the ordinance. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 12 '- Attorney Fritz Knaa.k, City Attorney, said it was not an uncommon ordinance. Most insurance i_ "' companies did cover those types of costs. In instances where there was none or where there was a - hardship, it might be possible to waive the charge _ Ms. Joanne Zmuda, 6051 Fourth Street N.E., asked if it was a car accident where someone was having a heart attack. Would they have to pay $400 to be taken to the hospital. Mr. Berg said that was a different issue. Allina would charge for that. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading and adopt the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 17. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A NEW CHAPTER OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE REGARDING ULTIMATE WRESTLING AND ESTABLISHING FEES. Mr. David Sallman, Public Safety Director, said a few years ago, there were some ultimate fighting contests around the City. At the time it seemed like something more appropriate for the State to deal with. A citizen complained and the City received a few letters. They included a question in the 2003 CounciUCommission survey asking if they should propose legislation relative to regulating those events and received an overwhelming response that they should. Fourteen states either ban or severely restrict these types of competitions. The competitions go by different names, but they were trying to deal with the activity itself. T'hey tried to put some restraints on licensing in an attempt to stop those events that may not be in the best interests of the City. They used a model ordinance from Illinois. A similar ordinance was adopted by West St. Paul and Bloomington. He spoke with Mr. Reilly about mixed martial arts and did not receive Mr. Reilly's request until February 6. They would need to conduct some additional research. He said they also recommended that the events be excluded from places that served alcohol. Several had been held in the City and there were some incidents. Mr. Reilly made the argument that they served beer at football and baseball games, but it was 3-2 beer and they were cut off in the third quarter and the 7�' inning. Those games were at a professional sports stadium and the primary reason for going there was to watch professional sports. A bar was a licensed establishment that happened to be holding an exhibition or fighting contest. Councilmember Billings said in the ordinance there were a couple of references to Chapter 11 of the City Code. One was in Section 132.15. He asked if that was correct. Mr. Sallman said that may have been included in that section mistakenly. Councilmember Billings asked what section provided for background checks on the promoter. Mr. Sallman said it was probably that section. _ I-__ FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 13 -- _: Councilmember Billings said if the City chose to embark on this course, one of the things the _ Police Department recommended was background checks on the promoters of the event. Mr. Sa11man agreed. Councilmember Barnette said the Minnesota State Boxing Commission was no longer in operation. He asked if there was any sta.te regulatory body that regulated the mixed martial arts, ultimate fighting, etc. Mr. Sa11man said he was unable to fmd anything that regulated ultimate fighting. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the ordinance was for ultimate wrestling or mixed martial arts. Mr. Sallman said it did not matter what terminology was used. What was more important was the rules of the contest. Were there weight classes? Were they making sure the contestants were evenly matched? Was there a doctor on hand? Councilmember Bolkcom said in the ordinance it stated that no persons under the age of 18 may be permitted to attend an ultimate wrestling match, but asked if they were referring to everything. Mr. Sallman said they were talking about anything that was licensed under the ordinance. Mayor Lund said mixed martial arts should be listed under the definition section of the proposed ordinance. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if an establishment serving liquor wanted to hold an event, could they hold it in a totally separate area where no liquor was served. Mr. Sallman said they could not. They would not support any splitting up of a licensed establishment. That would create other problems. Councilmember Bolkcom said their recommendation was that it be held someplace where no liquor was served. Mr. Sa11man agreed. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if any other communities had adopted an ordinance. Mr. Sallman said Bloomington had, but he did not know who else in Minnesota. had. Some states " banned some of these activities. Councilmember Barnette asked how an organization would become sanctioned. Mr. Sallman said there were professional associations that were named in the ordinance they used _ � - as a model. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9. 2004 PAGE 14 =- Councilmember Barnette asked how many events had been held in the last few years in Fridley. -_ ' Mr. Sallman said he was not sure. He was aware of five or six. Councilmember Billings said that in the definition of "combative sports," there was definition of "martial arts." He said before the next reading of the ordinance, it should be determined if that needed to be a definition by itself. Mr. Sallman said the intent was to try to provide some sort of framework so that there was some regulation of the events. He said they did not have much experience in this azea and would have to do more research. Mr. Mike Reilly, 4716 Oxborough Lane, Bloomington, said he e-mailed some information and had some information to hand out. Ms. Dee Dee Hurst, 10350 Grouse Street N.W., Coon Rapids, General Manager of the Minnesota Sports Cafe, asked if there was just one incident in which someone complained. Mr. Sa11man said they received an e-mail several years ago together with some additional materials. Ms. Hurst said she had been the General Manager of the Minnesota Sports Cafe for over two years. They have held numerous events, from boxing to ultimate fighting, and wanted to hold other events. In the two years, she said she could recall only one incident. She said they generated sales from those events and area businesses also benefited. Mr. Reilly said the people present at the meeting represented a growing population of people who were very passionate about their sport. He wanted to make a clear distinction between mixed martial arts and others. Mixed martial arts was a sport with clearly set rules. He said his fighters have fought in sanctioned shows across the country and they run much better and there was a much higher quality of production. Frequently, mixed martial arts had been confused with "toughman" or other no-skill combat arts. There had not been a single death in the sport of mixed martial arts, in North or South America. The wording of the ordinance demonstrated some of the confusion. It referred to "Ultimate Wrestling." Ultimate Wrestling and Ultimate Fighting were brand names of a promotion. They were not the name of a sport. He said he included suggestions for proper terminology in the material he gave to Council. The safety record of mixed martial arts was unmatched by any other contact sport. Nearly 85 percent of all matches end in voluntary submission of one of the competitors. At local levels, competitions generally ended under three minutes. He not only promoted shows, but trained fighters, and he would not allow them to engage in a no-holds barred fight or go anywhere if he thought the promoter was not looking out for their best interests. He would not be involved in this sport if it was brutal or dangerous. Mr. Reilly said for the sake of their fans, they strongly objected to the part of the ordinance about not selling alcohol. Banning the sale of alcohol placed their fans in an obvious and separate _ category from normal sports fans. The assumption that fighting plus beer would turn fans into a -_ - public menace was not true. He had been to hundreds of shows and saw few fights. Every time --_� FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING NIINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 15 -- _� someone did get boisterous or unruly, they were removed from the event. Trouble with alcohol . did not start with the entertainment provided. It started with inadequate security and length of time _ and availability. Once something was banned outright, you lost control over it. If they did not sell beer at a show, they would be contending with people smuggling in booze. Banning sales would be detrimental to the sport and counter-productive to the spirit of the ordinance. He suggested formulating a workable solution that would benefit everyone. Shows would have to provide adequate security, including one marked security personnel for every 100 people projected to attend. Security would adopt a zero tolerance policy towards violence or any potentially inciting behavior by anyone in attendance. Announcement of the policy would be made at the beginning - and during the event. Fights in the audience would be cause to shut down the show immediately and without refund. This was standard practice in most mixed martial arts shows around the � country. On top of the existing controls of the sale of alcohol covered by the establishment's liquor license, no sale would be allowed in the contest area after the last break which would take place no later than 2 bouts before the end of the card. Anyone leaving the contest area for the purpose of buying alcohol would not be allowed back into the contest viewing area. The event would run no longer than three hours. They were willing to work with Council on this issue. There was no local sanctioning body that currently existed, but that did not mean that one could not be created. Councilmember Billings said he understood that Mr. Reilly was not opposed to an ordinance that controlled this type of activity, he was just concerned with some of the material that had been presented to CounciL Mr. Reilly agreed. Councilmember Billings said a sanctioning organization was mentioned. He asked how long it would take to start one. Mr. Reilly said they had everything in place to do it right now. Their next event in March would be sanctioned by the Combat Sports Alliance. Councilmember Billings said he did not want to be a participant in establishing some kind of sanctioning organization that was so closely knit that it excluded others from joining. He said Mr. Reilly mentioned three organizations that did the promoting. He asked if that was two promoters besides Mr. Reilly. Mr. Reilly said it was three promoters outside of himself. Councilmember Billings said with respect to on-sale liquor establishments, Mr. Reilly said adequate security was needed if there was no intoxicating liquor being sold and even more security if there was. Mr. Reilly agreed. Councilmember Billings said that a long time ago, the Fridley City Council determined that in - order to have an on-sale liquor license, the business first had to be a resta.urant and there were provisions in the City Code that maintained a relationship between the sales of food and the sales FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 16 "- -', of alcohol. For a number of years, the City of Fridley only sold intoxicating liquor on-sale through -" a municipal liquor store. T'he ordinance was changed to allow people to have liquor licenses, but _- they strongly encouraged the food aspect. He said Council was coming from a history where - restaurants that served alcohol were strongly encouraged. His first inclination was to look very closely at the recommendation from the Police Department and to tread softly in the area of letting additional types of events in on-sale liquor establishments that get the City further and further away from the concept of restaurants that serve alcohol. If he did support something, he would need to support something along the guidelines that Mr. Reilly indicated. It sounded like the industry was moving in the direction that would create some self-governance. He said he was willing to wait some reasonable period of time to see how the self-governance organization � worked. 0 Mr. Reilly said they understood the history and provisions. Minnesota Sports Cafe currently held events such as volleyball games and boxing rnatches that did a.11ow the sale of alcohol. The one thing that would be mandated if they got a show was adequate security and cutting the sale of alcohol off. He said he was more concerned with fights taking place outside the event. He said he would like to see Council vote to table the first reading for one month in order to make changes and corrections to the ordinance. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how they dealt with minors. Mr. Reilly said at the Minnesota Sports Cafe, minors would not be an issue. He said he did not believe they were allowed. He said he did not feel comfortable making a judgment ca11 about whether someone should bring their child to an event. That was up to the parents to decide. He said they did not have a huge minor market. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if any other city had an ordinance, either in Minnesota or nation- wide, which was similar to what they were asking. Mr. Reilly said there were none in Minnesota. There had been some in Iowa, but unfortunately they had loopholes. The rules in Illinois were really confusing. The Nevada State Athletic Commission had the most detailed and established set of guidelines and procedures. Arizona had a pretty good commission. New Jersey was good, too. Georgia had the sport legalized about a year ago. Ms. Kelly Kobold, 900 Rae Drive, No. 6, Richfield, Minnesota, 55423, said she was currently ranked second in the world for women's mixed martial arts. She trained out of Bloomington. She considered herself to be a professional athlete. It was her career. It was a very safe sport, she had never been injured, and never had any ill feelings towards any competitor. There was a very strong fan base. They were trying to make the sport as common as football or baseball. She said mixed martial arts had changed her life. Ms. Saza Rockvam, 4606 Bloomington Avenue South, Minneapolis, said people had a pre- conceived notion of what mixed martial arts was. She said it was a combination of boxing, kick _ boxing and wrestling. It was not barbaric. The effect of alcohol on mixed martial arts matches -. "- ' FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE_17 -� _� was nothing compared to what went on in the NFL, NHL, basketball and baseball. She said she - had never had a problem at the events. Mr. Reilly said he highly recommended that the City prepare an ordinance but recommended that the first reading be tabled for one month to make sure everything was in place. Mayor Lund asked if they had a schedule of events. Mr. Reilly said on March 12 and Apri130 they would be at the Minnesota Sports Cafe. The event - was the international cage combat trials. There would be an event in Rochester on March 6. , Mayor Lund asked if Mr. Reilly did it nation-wide. Mr. Reilly said for international cage combat, it looked like they would be doing events in Chicago, New Mexico and Las Vegas. Mayor Lund said for Minnesota, they were basically talking about Fridley and Rochester. Mr. Reilly agreed. He said in the next year, he planned on being involved in events in Fridley, Blaine, Medina, Rochester, Red Wing, Owatonna, Duluth, St. Cloud, the Fargo area, Albert Lea and the Bemidji area. Mayor Lund asked if they had run into any opposition. Mr. Reilly said he had a 3 1/2 minute video presentation that showed the sport and what it was about. It usually did a good job of clearing up any pre-conceived notions. Mayor Lund said he did have concems about whether mixed martial arts should be included in the ordinance, the length of time of the events, and the number of events per year. He said he did have a problem with alcohol and minors. Mr. Reilly said he would like to see the ordinance modified to say "no unaccompanied minors" with an age limit set. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they had heard from everyone in the audience. Mayor Lund asked if there was anyone else in the audience who wanted to speak on the issue. Councilmember Billings said if they delayed taking any kind of action and ta.bled the ordinance he asked Mr. Reilly if he would be willing to help with some of the language for the ordinance. Mr. Reilly said he would. _ Councilmember Billings asked Mr. Sallman if they had any issues with waiting. Mr. Sallman said they did not. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 18 MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table the first reading of an ordinance establishing a new chapter of the Fridley City Code regarding ultimate wrestling and establishing fees until such time as staff was ready to bring it back to Council. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 18. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 402, WATER AND SEWER ADMINISTRATION, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE. Mr. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, said some of the changes to the ordinance involved updating terminology and changing references. Some changes were more substantive. On page 4 of the ordinance, staff suggested changes to add clarity and to correct a reference to other sections. On Page 5, language was added to allow a homeowner who had not previously connected to the system to use a private contractor for the hookup, which was the current policy. On Page 6, changes were made that would make the homeowner responsible for the repair or maintenance from the main to the premises. If the property owner requested the City to provide service on the line between the main and the premises, the homeowner would be charged for the cost of the repairs requested. It forma.lized the responsibility for the operation of the water service curb stop as a homeowner responsibility. Page 7 involved corrections in reference numbers. Page 8 started the process of removing the term "deposits." Page 9 established a charge for new owners as a one- time account setup fee. The City would no longer require new owners to purchase their meters. Under the current ordinance, owners would be refunded their initial purchase price. A new paragraph was added to provide some authority for the right of entry into a home for the sole purpose of repa.ir and maintenance of the water meter. Page 10 dealt with the non-payment of utility bills. It set up a penalty equal to the cost of the installation of an automated meter reading device. This would occur only after the fourth consecutive quarter of not reading the water meter. If the owner refused to allow access for the installation of the new meter, a penalty of $50 was proposed to be assessed monthly until the owner was in compliance. On Page 11, "storm water" was added. On Page 12, "water service" was added. References were corrected on Page 13. On Page 14, three references were corrected and references to Section 402.3, Meter Deposits, were deleted. Page 15 changed section numbers, added clarifying words, and increased the cost of testing a meter at the request of a customer if the meter was found to be within the normal range and was not defective. Section numbers were changed on Pages 16 and 17. Councilmember Barnette asked if there were a lot of people who did not send in their meter reading card. Mr. Pribyl said there were a number who were repetitive. Mr. Burns, City Manager, asked if City appraisers still did readings. Mr. Pribyl said they did not. _. -- � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9. 2004 PAGE 19 -- _- Councilmember Barnette asked if they received complaints from people who were gone during the _ winter and were charged a minimum fee. Mr. Pribyl said people have commented on that. Even though they were not using water, there was still a fixed cost of maintaining the account. Councilmember Bolkcom said "city treasury" was removed in some places and left in others. She asked if that was done for a reason. - Mr. Pribyl said it was replaced in Section 402.15 because of the association with the word "deposit." 0 �• - ■�i Councilmember Bolkcom asked what was being inspected and what was included in the permit fee under Section 402.05. Mr. Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director, said the inspection was visual to insure the proper materials and proper connections were made. Councilmember Bolkcom said the City did a visual check. She asked how they knew if the materials were proper. Mr. Haukaas said the holes were typically less than 10 feet and you could see what materials were use and what kind of connection was made. Councilmember Bolkcom mentioned a resident who had some concerns about the inspection of her water and sewer connection. She asked about a report that staff was preparing as a result of a survey of other cities regarding inspections. Mr. Haukaas said they were finalizing their report and would have the results soon. With respect to inspections, building inspectors and plumbing inspectors did only visual inspections. They would not put themselves into an unsafe situation. It was still the responsibility of a licensed contractor to perform the work and to make sure things were done correctly. Councilmember Bolkcom said they could see that the connections and level were correct. She asked what Section 402.06 meant. Mr. Haukaas said when the ordinance was written, the City did the repairs. That was no longer the case, and the changes reflected the way things were currently done. If the homeowner could not find a contractor that they were comfortable with or were not willing to work with a private contractor to have the work done, the City could do it and charge based on costs. Councilmember Bolkcom said she needed further clarification. She asked about water meters and the deposit. Mr. Pribyl said at one time the deposit was included in the ordinance. State statute then required that anything termed a deposit had to have interest paid. At one time the City required the FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 20 '- purchase and resale of the meter. When a new homeowner opened an account, they bought the -�� meter from the City. If they sold their home, the City would repurchase the meter. The change _- would institute a set-up fee for a new customer and get rid of the terminology associated with the - purchase and resale of the meters. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what AMR meant. Mr. Pribyl said it was mentioned in a previous section and meant automated meter reading device. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the refusal of entry clause under Section 402.17. Attorney Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, said if the language authorizing entry was not included, the City would not have any right to enter the property. It gave the City the authority to go in and it gave the employee allowed to go in the authority to be there. If someone were to challenge it, under the right circumstances, it might not be foolproof. Councilmember Bolkcom asked who would be liable if the house was rented out and the renter did not let anyone in to read the meter. Attorney Knaak said the clause gave the City the authority to have an employee on the property and justified the employee being there. The City was not required to provide water to its residents. If the individual was not cooperating, the City's response could be to turn the water off. Mayor Lund asked if there was something in the ordinance that said after a specified period of time, the water would be shut off. Mr. Pribyl said there was not. Attomey Knaak said it was a charge that was reasonably related to the cost incurred by the City as a result of the refusal. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if under Section 402.18, the City could turn off someone's water service without notice. Mr. Pribyl said in lieu of shutting off the water, the City had taken the position that delinquencies were certified to t�es. Mr. Burns said generally when someone's water was shut off, they were repairing a water main break or closing off the system for some reason. Mr. Haukaas said if the Public Works Department had to shut off the water, it was generally for a water main break. They looked at the system to see where they need to shut things off and they tried to get the message out to the homeowners in the area. If someone was not home, they would have to shut off the water but they made an effort to let everyone know. _ -- � FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 21 -� _- Councilmember Bolkcom said in No. 5 under Section 402.20, "is" should be used instead of "are." _ Under Section 402.22, Notice of Leak, she asked what would happen if someone was out of town. _ Under Section 402.32, City Inspection, No. 3, if a meter was tested and it was not accurate, would the $25 administration fee still be charged. Mr. Pribyl said if the meter was not accurate, there would be no charge. Councilmember Barnette asked anyone in Fridley still had a separate system. - Mr. Haukaas said he thought there might be a property on East River Road and they were working with the property owner. Couuncilmember Billings said that under Section 402.17 there were a couple of clauses that should read "meter reading post card" instead of "card." He said he thought language should be included that addressed other methods of responding in addition to meter reading cards. Mr. Pribyl said they could come up with more terms so that as technology changed, this did not have to be updated. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what would happen if she did not want to read her water meter anymore. Could they put an AMR on her meter. Mr. Pribyl said they could. Councilmember Bolkcom asked how much it would cost. Mr. Haukaas said he believed the current cost of an AMR was approximately $250. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to waive the reading and adopt the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if staff would clarify the questions that were brought up. Mr. Pribyl said they would. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 19. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE 2005 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM. Mr. Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director, outlined the area included in the 2005 the street reconstruction program. The consulting engineer would do a survey of the entire project a.rea, prepaze the preliminary engineering report, prepare the preliminary assessment roll, prepare the " plans and specifications, review the bids and make a recommendation for award. During the construction phase, the consulting engineer would be responsible for staking, inspection, and i _y FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 22 '- general contract administration, would review pay requests and make recommendations for -_ " payment. Requests for proposals were sent out to five firms and they received four responses. - Two proposals stood out. One was from Short Elliot Hendrickson and the other was from Bolton _ & Menk. He said they had worked with both firms and had good luck with them. Staff recommended that the contract be awarded to Short Elliot Hendrickson (SEH). They provided the best price. They proposed a fixed, lump-sum cost of $126,000 for the design phase. They also proposed a fee of 8 percent for the construction phase to cover contract administration, surveying, construction staking and inspections. If the project went slow and they ended up putting extra hours in, it would not be billed to the City. They were there to keep the project moving. Staff inet with them about this project and had worked with them successfully in the past. The cities of � Crystal, Golden Valley and Minnetonka sent letters in support of SEH. Staff recommended that Council award the contract for design and construction administration services for the 2005 street _ reconstruction program to Short Elliot Hendrickson. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to award the contract for design and construction administration services for the 2005 street reconstruction program to Short Elliot and Hendrickson. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 20. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR THE 85 AVENUE TRAIL PROJECT. Mr. Jon Haukaas, Public Works Director, said several years ago the City applied for a federal aid grant to construct a trail along the City's north boundary on 85�' Avenue. The purpose of the trail was to connect the Northtown area and University Avenue bike trail to the Mississippi Regional Trail on East River Road. A portion of the trail was in Coon Rapids but Coon Rapids had rnoney set aside to create the trail and wanted to do it in conjunction with the reconstruction of 85th Avenue by Anoka County. Fridley received the grant for fiscal year 2006 federal aid. The Minnesota. State Aid Program had money available to advance those programs. They would give the City a zero interest loan and the City would pay them when it received the Federal grant. The consultant would survey the entire project azea, coordinate the geo-technical investigation, and coordinate any necessary right-of-way or easement acquisitions. The City had control of a majority of the trail. The consultant would prepare the Project Memorandum which was an official document required under the Federal aid program. The consultant would also coordinate with the Federal Highway Administration on any of their requirements for using the money and with MnDOT, Anoka County, the Minnesota DNR and any other utilities involved in the project. The consultant would also prepare the plans and specs, help the City with the bidding process and during construction would run the project. They would be responsible for staking, inspection and general contract administration. Mr. Haukaas said they felt the best proposal was submitted by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates. They had an excellent understanding of the project and the requirements of a Federal _ aid job and had done this type of work before. Staff recommended that Council award the contract _ -_ R FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING NIINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 23 -- t for design and construction administration for the 85�' Avenue Trail Project to Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the City was in any danger of losing the Federal aid grant. She asked if there was something in writing. Mr. Haukaas said the money was allocated to the City of Fridley and would be available in 2006. It did have a sunset date in late 2007 that the money would have to be committed by. There was no risk in moving forward early. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the cost. Mr. Haukaas said Federal aid trails had blanket requirements. A trail built across bedrock had the same requirements as one built across wetlands. One of the things they were looking at was actually doing an elevated trail to eliminate impact on the wetlands. They had size requirements. The trail had to be a minimum of 8 feet wide with 2 additional feet on either side for clearances. Railings were required if there was an elevated section. He said they may have over estimated the cost to be safe. They would have a better idea of the costs, once they started the design and actual alignment of the project. Some of the requirements to get the project included things other than the trail. It included interpretive signage. Mr. Burns said this trail would connect with a segment of trail that Coon Ra.pids was building. He asked if they were using the same design firm. Mr. Haukaas said they had money set aside to do the trail, but they were going to do it in conjunction with Anoka County's reconstruction of 85�' Avenue. Councilmember Barnette asked when that would be done. Mr. Haukaas said Anoka County had included it in their plan and have identified 2008 for that project. They do not have any funding identified, however, so it may change. Coon Rapids planned to have the County design the trail along with the reconstruction and would pay them for that portion. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if 85�' Avenue was reconstruction would that affect the proposed trail. Mr. Haukaas said they were aware of that. When Anoka County gave the project their support, they included the warning that if the reconstruction of 85�' Avenue impacted the trail, the City would have to bear the costs. In view of that, they planned to put the trail primarily outside of the County's right-of-way. If it had an impact outside of their right-of-way, it would be the County's cost to repair. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the trail was handicapped accessible. Mr. Haukaas said the entire length would be handicapped accessible. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 9, 2004 PAGE 24 Mayor Lund asked about snowplowing. Mr. Haukaas said there was no intention to snowplow the trail at this time. Mayor Lund asked about the cost efFiciency with doing it in conjunction with Coon Rapids and Anoka County's project. Mr. Haukaas said the reason they did it was because they received a Federal grant. Coon Rapids had money allocated and set aside, but they did not have space outside of the right-of-way to construct it ahead of time. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to award the contract for design and construction administration services for the 85�' Avenue Trail Project to Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates for a total cost of $149,828.00. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 21. INFORMAL STATUS REPORT. Mr. Richard Pribyl, Finance Director, said the Charter Commission would be holding a public meeting on Tuesday, February 10, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. regarding a proposal to amend the language of the City Charter that was passed by voters in 2002 relating to restrictions on tax levy and other fees. They felt there were some unintended consequences of the language with respect to the water, sewer and storm water funds in that many of the expenses incurred by those activities were pass-through expenses. Mr. William Burns, City Manager, said he would like to discuss the CounciUCommission survey and the Finance Department's request to hire an Assistant Liquor Store Manager. ADJOURNMENT: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn the City Council meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. Respectfully submitted, Roberta S. Collins Scott J. Lund Secretary Mayor , _. -. �., • � � MEMORANDUM '� PARTMENT O F DLEY t�.�.i . .IC�[Ai�n D. PRIBYL �rn�ero�� flr�Fr�rnR TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: LAST MINUTE CORRECTIONS TO CHAPTERS 11, 206 AND 402 DATE: MARCH 8, 2004 One of the hazards of a last minute review is that you might actually find something that needs to be changed. Today while a number of us were doing a last minute review, a few items popped out as needing to be changed. If you would replace the following pages with those that are attached to this memo: Chapter 11- Replace pages ! 8� 2- Only page two changes, the two day auction fee was removed. Replace pages 9& 10 - Only page 10 changes, please note these changes provide consistent presentation with other similar permit fees(Sewer Permit Fee). The fee itself for this type of fee is identified in Chapter 206. Chapter 402 Replace pages 23 & 24 - The only problem with these pages is that the numbers on sections 1 through 5 disappeared somehow when it was emailed. Chapter 206 Replace pages 41 8� 42. Jon Haukaas reviewed this area and updated some language, corrected the water and sewer connection permit fee, and deleted two old changes. t "s / � cmr aF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER�� RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: 2"d READING OF AN AMENDMENT TO FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 11, FEES DATE: March 4, 2004 At the Council Meeting of February 23, 2004, Staff reviewed fee changes identrfied in Chapter 11. During 2003, a fee study was completed as part of the budget work for the 2004 Budget. As a result of the study, we have seen a number of areas in which the senrice being provided was not recovering the cost of the delivered setviee. Staff reviewed each of the services and made determinations on whether the City had both the legal authority and the need to raise those fees that were not recovering cost. Each of the changes that are being made to Chapter 11, have been incorporated into the 2004 Budget. It is estimated that the total impact of the new revenues associated with these increases would amount to $98,894.00. These changes were reviewed during a conference session with Council last year. Staff has corrected the typos ident�ed at the February 23`� meeting. Also a question was asked regarding the fee regarding auctions. We have done some research regarding the fees for auctions and found that this section was changed in 1994, with no explanation as to why the same fee was charged for the two types of permits. The fee study indicated that the cost was the same for both activities and no change in fee increase was recommended. Also a question was asked about the liquor licenses under chapter 603. The question was one regarding a license cost commensurate with the cost of enforcement for liquor licenses with entertainment. Staff reviewed this issue and found that in accordance with the fee study, the liquor licenses issued with entertainment were priced $1,000 higher than with no entertainment. It is felt that when the group of entertainment licensee's are taken as a whole, the revenue covers the expense of administration and enforcement. It is also felt that the same occurs with the non- entertainment licenses. Staff recommends the second reading of this ordinance. :�' ii- - • � � f� � ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 11. FEES The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby find and ordain; after review, examination and staff recommendation that Chapter 11 of the Fridley City Code be hereby amended and ordain as follows: _ FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 11. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND FEES 11.10. FEES License and permit fees shall be as follows; CODE SUBJECT 17 Auction 27 Billiards 15 Bowling Alleys 28 Carnivals 30 Charitable Gambling (See Lawful Gambling) 21 Christmas Tree Lots 12 Cigarette Sales (see Tobacco) 206 217a Contractors Conversion Condominium (one time fee) 02 FEE Q�n nn .� ,. � a.,.,�� $30.00 weekly, $150 year $40.00 for first table, $10.00 each additional $40.00 + $10.00/lane $200 deposit, $75 application fee, and $75.00 for first day; $75 each additional day $200.00 + $100.00 deposit See Chapter 206 (a) 2 Ownership Units $ 500 (b) 3-7 Ownership Units $ 750 (c) 8-12 Ownership Units $1,000 (d) Over 12 Units $1,000 plus $50 per unit for every unit over 12 Ordinance No. � 4 T��le--'�� e� cn nn �„ .,�„ ��,;,,rt � n4 c �mirC�e-^� Qi cn nn i n4 T T�'(� n��,�� Q � cn nn r,, o oa � �� n4 oT-�r�cri�i�l.ii� Q i cn nn r,.. =-�",�°.,,,,� i n4 oTrcz^-�crC��v Qcnn nn r_,,,,;,, �io.,.,+,,,.� i nQ � �sae�� 4 Qcn_oo �;� ..v �� . . � �� . . �� - - . �. .� .� �� „ �. . �� . ��. �. �� . �� - �� 19 205 Used Motor Vehicles Wetlands Certifying Exemptions Replacement Plan Application No Loss Determination Appeal of Decision 113 Yard Waste Transfer Site Gate Fee FEES FOR SERVICES RENDERED � $150.00/year $1,500.00 �5�8 $1,500.00 �99 $1,500.00 �5-A8 $1.500.00 ��A9 $2.00 per car $3.50 per pickup truck or small trailer Page�g I - • . � ' Ordinance No. Page,B� � b ! 206 206 206 206 211 206 212 206 211 206 206 205 206 205 205 206 206 4�8� 206 205 211 Building Permit Fees Certificate of Occupancy Fees Electrical Permit Fees Land Alteration Excavating or Grading Fees Uniform Building Code Chapter 70 adopted by reference (Plan Checking Fees and Grading Permit Fees) Lot Splits Mechanical Permit Fees Mining Permit Moving Permits Fee Plat Plumbing Permit Fees Reinspection - Building Fee Rezoning Sewer Permit Fee Special Use Town House Development Utility Excavations Permit Fees Water a�d-Sewe� Permit Fee Water/Waterways Permit Fees City Vacations Variance �� See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 $1,250.00 ��8 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 $1,500.00 �89:8A/20 lots + $15.00 each additional lot See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 $1,500.00 �9A:�8 See Chapter 206 $1,500.00 4AA:�9 for all, $100.00 for 2nd access, building $500.00 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 � � T'°��;* �°° ne......;+ �eo Q�nn See Chapter 206 $1,250.00 �58:�A $250.00 bA:�9A for R-1, $1,400.00 -�89 for all other Ordinance No. Page 6 2. At such time as there is a chan�e of customer or propertV ownership for existin customers, all new customers to the svstem will be required to pav _a one-hme administrative set un char�e at the rate set annuallv bv an admimstrahv_e pohcv n �i • +• � -- + +o..,, M b ' � f � A. Those persons who naid to purchase a meter nrior to the effective date of this ordinance mav have the purchase price returned upon satisfactorv nroof of transfer of title and possession of said premises The purchase price shall be first deducted from the bill if there are unpaid bills or charges. B. The liabilitv of the Citv for return of said purchase funds however shall be limited to the funds as are available in the water fund and shall not constrtute a�eneral obligation to the Citv. 3. All water meters installed under the provisions of this Chapter shall remain the properiy of the City of Fridley. The meters shall be repaired from time to time as is necessary to ensure accurate measuring of the flow of water. The City sha11 pay for the cost of repairs except when a meter has been damaged due to negligence on the part of persons other than employees of the Water �e�ie Department. The owner, occupant or user of the premises or such other person desiring use of the water sha11 reimburse the Water Department for the expense of repairing any such damaged meter. Upon failure to reimburse the Water Department within a reasonable time and upon demand therefore, the water service and supply to said premises may be shut off or discontinued as determined to be in the best interest of the City. A Ri�ht of entrance Everv uerson owning imuroved real estate that has had a water meter installed shall allow dulv authorized emplovees of the crtv or a designated representative of the Citv, bearing proper credentials and identification, to enter all properties for the uurpose of reading, repairing, or replacin� the meter, or for the nurnose of installing an automated meter reading device (AMR . 402.16. TAMPERING PROHIBITED It shall be unlawful for any person to tamper with, alter, by-pass or in any manner whatsoever interfere with the proper use and functioning of any water meter owned by the City. 402.17. METER READING AND PAYMENT FOR SERVICES The City may provide a system of water meter reading , � � deemed suitable t��e�'flese by the City Council. The City may also establish billing areas or districts and provide for the readings of ineters and billing charges by month, by calendar quarters or monthly quarters, or such periodic intervals as the City Council shall determine suitable and necessary from time to time to the needs of the City. In the case of a post-card meter reading, each consumer shall mail or return the meter card on or before the due a3 Ordinance No. date. Page 7 2. Each consumer shall be assessed a one dollar ($1.00) penalty for any card not returned within seven (7) days of the due date. 3. A charge of ten dollars ($10.00) will be added to the bill if the meter reading pOSt card is not returned to the City for the second consecutive quarter billing. 4. A charge of fifteen dollars ($15.00) will be added to the bill if the meter reading pOSt card is not returned to the City for the third consecutive quarter. Such penalty and any use charges (based on an estimate of the water consumed) will be added to every quarterly billing thereafter if subsequently not read. 5. If the meter reading post card is not returned to the City for the fourth consecutive quarter, an ARM shall be installed on the uropertv The urouertv owner shall pav a penaltv eQual to the full cost of the meter and installation which will be added to_the bill. If the plumbing is substandard, the propertv owner will be responsible for bringing the plumbing up to code at their own expense. A Refusal of Entrv Anv uerson refusin� to allow entrv of a dulv authorized emplovee or desi�nated representative, as described in 402.15.3.A., shall be required to pav a uenalty of $50 00 per month which shall be added to everv subsequent utilitv bill. The penaltv shall be added everv month until the nropertv owner is in comnliance with this section. � 6. The water rate charges sha11 be considered net charges and shall be the chazges payable after the last day of the month or billing period in which the billings are sent out. � 7. Payments not paid within thirty (30) days from the date of the bill will be assessed an additional ten percent (10%) penalty. (Ref. 662, 988) 402.18. DISCONTINUANCE OF SERVICE The City reserves the right to discontinue service to any customer of the water and sewer system without notice when necessary for repairs, additional connection or reconnection or for non-payment of charges or bills or for disregard of any rules or regulations in connection with the use or operation of said system. Whenever any service has been discontinued for non-payment of charges or bills or for disregard of any rules or regulations, it shall not be resumed, except upon payment of the charges of bills accrued together with compliance with the rules or regulations previously violated and payment to the City of a restoration fee ^�+'�° �•�-~ ^� ��° a^"�� QC nm , . , set annuallv bv an administrative policv �+ "' `�'''°"+°�' " . (Ref. 565) �� ,i Ordinance No. Page 9 � (5) Disconnection of Hazardous Installation: If while making an inspection, the electrical inspector finds that a new installation thax is energized is not in compliance with accepted standards of construction as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 326.243 Safety StandardS of the Minnesota Electrical Act, the inspector shall, if the installation or the noncomplying part tbereof is such as to seriously and proximaxely endanger human life and property, order immediate disconnection of the installation or noncomplying part. VJhen tho person responsible for making the installation ordered disconnected hereunder is notified, they shall promptly proceed to make the coaections cited in this disconnect order. (Re£ 901) (6) Corrections of Noncomplying Installations. When a noncomplying installation whether energized or not, is not proximately dangerous to human life and property, the inspector shall issue a correction order, ordering the owner or contractor to make the installation comply with accepted standards of construction for safety to life and property, noting specifically what changes aze required. The order of the inspector sha11 specify a dat� of not less than 10 nor more than 17 calendar days from the date of the order. F. Moving of Dwelling or Building Fee. The perniit fee for the moving of a dwelling or building shall bo in accordanc� with the following schedule: For Principle Building into City ............................................................................................ $ 300.00 For Accessory Buildi.ng into Ci ........................................ $ 42.00 iy ................................................... For Moving any building out of City ..................................................................................... $ 20.00 For moving through or withi.n the City .................................................................................. $ 20.00 G. Wreckiag Permit Fee. (1) For any permit for thc wrecking of any building or portion thereo� the fee charged for each such building included in such permit shall be based on the cubical contents thereof and shall be at the rate of one dollaz and twenty-five cents ($1.25) for each one thousand (1000) eubic feet or fraction thereof. (2) For structtires which would be impractical to cube, the wrecking permit fee shall be based on the total cost of wrecldng such structure at the rata of six dollars ($6.00) for each five hundred dollars ($500.00) or fraction thereof. (3) In no case shall the fee charged for any wrecking permit be less than twenty dollars ($Z0.00). 41 � Ordinance No. , s. H. Water and Sewer Fees. (Ref. 901) Page 10 Hydrant Rental Agreement - Service Charge .......................................................................... $50.00 (for use of hydrant only - City does not supply hose e�eq�ri�x�) Water Usage Metered ....................................................................$ 1.25 �89/1,000 gallons used Minimum....................................................................................................... $10.00 Tanker........................................................................................................... $10.00 per fill Water Taps .................................$400.00 plus cost per square foot for the area to be restored. Permanent Street Patch — First5 sq. yds ........................................................................................................ $300.00 Over5 sq. yds ........................................................................................ $30.00 per sq.yd. Temporary Street Patch (Nov. 1 through May 1) First5 sq. yd . ............................................................................................... $400.00 Over5 sq. yd .................................................................................................. $40.00 per sq. yd. plus cost of permanent street patch Water Meter Repair - Weekend & Holidays ......................................................................... $125.00 Water Connections Permit ............................................................................................. $50.00 �3-89 Sewer Connections Permit ............................................................................................. $50.00 �5-A8 Inspection Fee for Water/Sewer Line Repair .......................................................................... $40.00 I. Land Alterations, Excavating, or Grading Fees including Conservation Plan Implementation Fees. (Ref. 901,1012) 50 cubic yards or less ....................................................................................................................... $40.00 51 to 100 cubic yards ....................................................................................................................... $47.50 101 to 1,000 cubic yards .................................................................................................................... $47.50 for the first 100 cubic yards plus $10.50 for each additional 100 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards ............................................................................................................ $167.00 for the first 1,000 cubic yards plus $9.00 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards ........................................................................................................ $273.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards plus $40.50 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 100,001 cubic yards or more .......................................................................................................... .$662.50 for the first 100,000 cubic yards plus $22.50 for each additional 100,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. �� / � CITY dF FRIDLEY TO: 3:Z�7T� AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 WILLIAM W. BURNS, CtTY MANAGER � � RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FfNANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: 2"d READING OF AN AMENDMENT TO FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 11, FEES DATE: March 4, 2004 At the Council Meeting of February 23, 2004, Staff reviewed fee changes identfied in Chapter 11. During 2003, a fee study was compieted as part of the budget work for the 2004 Budget. As a result of the study, we have seen a number of areas in which the service being provided was not recovering the cost of the delivered serviee. Staff reviewed each of the services and made determinations on whether the Ciiy had both the legal authority and the need to raise those fees that were not recovering cost. Each of the changes that are being made to Chapter 11, have been incorporated into the 2004 Budget. It is estimated that the total impact of the new revenues associated with these increases would amount to $98,894.00. These changes were reviewed during a conference session with Council last year. Staff has corrected the typos identified at the February 23`� meeting. Also a question was asked regarding the fee regarding auctions. We have done some research regarding the fees for auctions and found that this section was changed in 1994, with no explanation as to why the same fee was charged for the finro types of permits. The fee study indicated that the cost was the same for both activities and no change in fee increase was recommended. Also a question was asked about the liquor licenses under chapter 603. The question was one regarding a license cost commensurate with the cost of enforcement for liquor licenses with entertainment. Sfaff reviewed this issue and found that in accordance with the fee study, the liquor licenses issued with entertainment were priced $1,000 higher than with no entertainment. It is felt that when the group of entertainment licensee's are taken as a whole, the revenue covers the expense of administration and enforcement. It is also felt that the same occurs with the non- entertainment licenses. Staff recommends the second reading of this ordinance. :�- „- � ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 11. FEES The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby find and ordain, after review, examination and staff recommendation that Chapter 11 of the Fridley City Code be hereby amended and ordain as follows: . �`� FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 11. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND FEES 11.10. FEES License and permit fees shall be as follows; CODE SUBJECT 17 Auction 27 Billiards 15 Bowling Alleys 28 Carnivals 30 Charitable Gambling (See Lawful Gambling) 21 Christmas Tree Lots 12 Cigarette Sales (see Tobacco) 206 Contractors 217a Conversion Condominium (one time fee) a2. Y- � V" . FEE Q�n nn � ,. � a��=�� $30.00 weekly, $150 year $40.00 for first table, $10.00 each additional $40.00 + $10.00/lane $200 deposit, $75 application fee, and $75.00 for first day; $75 each additional day $200.00 + $100.00 deposit See Chapter 206 � (a) 2 Ownership Units $ 500 (b) 3-7 Ownership Units $ 750 � (c) 8-12 Ownership Units $1,000 (d) Over 12 Units $1,000 plus $50 per unit for every unit over 12 � • -- 1 - -- Ordinance No. 217b Condominium (annual fee) 208 Conservation Plan Review (as part of building permit for new construction) 208 Conservation Plan Review as part of land alteration, excavating, or grading permit process) 101 Dogs Page 3 every unit over 12 (a) 2-4 Ownership Units $ 20 (b) 5-12 Ownership Units $ 30 (c) 13-24 Ownership Units $ 40 (d) Over 24 Ownership Units $ 50 $450.00 See Chapter 206 $5.0� �-� cn i.To„+e..sa ,.,. �...,,,°a Qc nn �r,,..,,e,.+o,.oa ,,.. i.T,,,� ,ea $10.00 �-AB-Duplicate{�e��.�e�- �-:89 �.�* $25.00 Kennel 702 Drive-in Theaters $400.00 607 Entertainment $85.00 112 False Alarms $50.00 for sixth false alarm in single calendaz year and for each subsequent false alazm in calendar year, an additional$25.00 (e.g., 7th false alann =$75.00, 8th false alarm - $100.00, 9th false alarm $125.00, etc.). i n4 �:r n i.,....�, r..�+.,i�„�„ Qcn nn 103 Fire Arms —r��t� �.,....., Q � n nn Permit to Discharge $25.00 32 Food Establishments $45.00 (Business License) �� Q� �,nn 32 Food, Temporary $30.00 (Business License) 30 Gambling (See Lawful Gambling) 3 6 Ordinance No. 25 Golf Course, Driving Range 26 Hotels, Motels 202 House Trailers -Temp offices 24 Junk Yards 30 Lawful Gambling Permit 603 Liquor, Lawful Gambling Endorsement 603 Liquor (On-Sale) No Entertainment Entertainment and or Dancing Investigation Fee 603 603 C11I►•7 603 603 605* Liquor (Sunday) Liquor, Temp. Intox. On-Sale (1 day only) Liquor, Non-Intox. Malt: Off Sa1e Beer On Sale Beer On Sale Temporary Beer Investigation Fee, initial On Sale Beer Liquor (Wine) Investigation Fee, initial Liquor (Employee Dispensing) (See Managerial License) Liquor (Bottle Club) 4 Page 4 $30.00 $125.00 first unit; $5.00 each additional $30.00 temporary parking $75.00 occupancy $350.00 $25.00 for one day small events, i.e. raffle, etc. $300.00 0-3000 sq.ft. 3001-6000 sq.ft over 6000 sq.ft. $6,000 * $7,000 * $8,000 * $7,000 * $8,000 * $9,000 * $200.00 individual, $400.00 corp. partnership, etc. $200.00* $25.00* (MN §340A.414, Sub.9) $60.00* $325.00* (includes off sale) $60.00 $90.00 individual, $180.00 corp. partnership, etc. $1,000.00 $200.00 individual, $400.00 corp. partnership, etc. $300.00 Annual permit $25.00 One day permit _ - � -- - I Ordinance No. Page 5 606* Liquor (On-Sale Club) $300.00/club, under 200 members (The annual license fee $500.00/club, 201-500 members for an on-sale intox- $650.00/club, 501-1,000 members icating liquor license $800.00/club, 1,001-2,000 members issued by a city to a $1,000.00/club, 2,001-4,000 club must be no greater than:) members $2,000.00/club, 4,001-6,000 members $3,000.00/club, over 6,000 members *CHECK CURRENT STATE STATUTE, CHAPTER 340A, FOR ANY CHANGES IN STATE FEE SCHEDULE (CURRENT FEE SCHEDULE FROM 1990 STATE STATUTE) 101 608 603 203 509 Livestock Lodging T� Managerial License Mobile Home Pazks Motorized Vehicles Rental 18 Motor Vehicle Body Repair Business Investigation Fee Renewal, Transfer, or Amendment Fee Joint Application as Junkyazd 220 Joint Application as Used Motor Vehicle Dealer Joint Application as Used Motor Vehicle Dealer and Junkyazd Joint Application Renewal, Transfer, or Amendment Multiple Dwelling (Ref Ord 1154) 5 $35.00 each 3% of rent charged $10.00 $30.00 + $1.00 per trailer site (One time fee) $50.00/Vehicle $150.00 each location $50.00 $350.00 �38:A8 each location $450.00 each location $250.00 each location $600.00 each location Same as original application Single rental unit $41.25 �SA Two rental units $82.50 � Three units $123.75 nz.�v Four units $165.00 �9 Five or more units - $165.00 �-�-A plus $8.25 �-59 per unit. Ordinance No. 22 31 14 23 113 13 407 407.04 407.05 407.07 407.07 407.07 407.07 407.10 407.11 125 125 125 Reinspection Fee Transfer Fee License Fee after Revocation or Suspension Music Festivals Pawn Shops Page 6 $150.00 bC��B $25.00 150% times the annual license fee $700.00/day + $100.00 filing fee Annual Licensee Fee $3,000 Monthly Transaction Fee $1.50 per transaction Reporting Failure Penalty $2.50 per transaction Investigation Fee $400 (Ref. Ord. 1137) Peddlers/Solicitor $60.00 per peddler Public Dance $75.00 Refuse Haulers, Garbage Truck $60.00 for first truck and $15.00 each additional truck Retail Gasoline Sales $60.00 Private Pump $30.00 per location Rights-Of-Way — (See Ord. 1116 & 1139) Registration Fee $50.00 �?39 User Fee $50.00 �A:99 per project (Residential, commercial or industrial) Excavation Permit $250.00 �A9:98 Obstruction Permit $50.00 �A8 Permit Extension $20.00 �A8 Delay Penalty Permit extension fee plus $125.00 -�8A:89 penalty. Mapping Fee $20.00 �9:A8 if data is not in city format and City GIS compatible Degradation Cost Restoration cost per squaze foot for the area to be restored. Saunas and Massage Parlors (Business Investigation Fee) Saunas and Massage Parlors (Operation and Maintenance) Saunas and Massage Parlors (Certificate Investigation 0 $1,500.00 $3,000.00/year $100 each _- - � __ - I Ordinance No. _ - = Fee) 125 127 214 514 Saunas and Massage Parlors (Employee Massage Practice Certificate) Sexually Oriented Businesses Investigation Fee Signs and/or Billboards Permanent Sign Temporary Sign Snow Removal Penalty Page 7 $50 each/year $400 $400 I II ••• - •• �� .� $75.00 �9:99 under 40 sq ft $100.00 59�9 over 40 sq ft $200.00 Deposit-refunded if conditions met Violations of the provisions of this Section shall be a misdemeanor, subject to penalties of a maximum of $700.00 and 90 days in jail per occurrence. In the alternative, the City may, in its discretion, impose a civil penalty as follows: 2"a Offense in any given year: 50.00 3ra Offense within 6 months of any prior offense: $200.00 4�' Offense or more within 6 months of prior offense(s): $500.00 In addition, the City may chazge to, and assess to the associated property, any damage to City property or injury to City employees attributable to violations of this section. � ��+�v Qc cn ..e e,,;aer�;..t a.,,sii;.,,. ��«LL „f � n •+ a tt;,�1� vzrrioracsiaicrpc= :: w-..-y=— AR„1+:«te .a.,,ell;.,� .�� 1 2 �i .�ev+��e.a � s� n e .ie.� 41.e iti.iir�n rnn:in,in2 „+..nn+ . �71 L.e FL,� 1 +l,e �. _..+ .. „t,..,..+ b-- ---- ------ --- — s L.;..1, +L.e l�;4�. ,.ns>;.,.. 7 Ordinance No. 206 206 206 206 211 206 212 206 211 206 206 205 206 205 205 206 206 4� 206 205 211 Building Permit Fees Certificate of Occupancy Fees Electrical Permit Fees Land Alteration Excavating or Grading Fees Uniform Building Code Chapter 70 adopted by reference (Plan Checking Fees and Grading Permit Fees) Lot Splits Mechanical Permit Fees Mining Permit Moving Permits Fee Plat Plutnbing Permit Fees Reinspection - Building Fee Rezoning Sewer Permit Fee Special Use Town House Development Utility Excavations Permit Fees Water a�-�ewe� Permit Fee Water/Waterways Permit Fees City Vacations Variance �� Page � I b See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 $1,250.00 �59-A9 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 $1,500.00 �:A9/20 lots + $15.00 each additional lot See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 $1,500.00 �9�A8 See Chapter 206 $1,500.00 488:99 for all, $100.00 for 2nd access, building $500.00 See Chapter 206 See Chapter 206 � r T'°��:* �°° De...�.;� �oo Q�nn See Chapter 206 $1,250.00 �59:88 $250.00 68:89 for R-1, $1,400.00 �99 for all other Ordinance No. _ - �- *Prorate (see Chapter 603) 11 Page 11 Ordinance No. Page 12 " f _ I � Chapter 108 — Construction, Alteration, Modification or Installation Fees _ , MSFC �.. Section Type of Activity. � Stipulations ` Fee 105.7.1 Automatic Fire Extinguishing Systems Fina Inspection 1. Kitchen Hood Extinguishing Systems Required See Below 2. Fire Sprinkler Systems Inspection & Testing 3. Other Special Extinguishing Systems Inspection & Testing Inspection & Testing 105.7.2 Compressed Gasses & Systems Final Inspection Install, repair damage to, abandon, remove, place Required $ 235.00 temporarily our of service, close or MSFC requirements substantially modify systems 105.7.3 Fire Alarm, Detection 6 Related Alarm or Final Inspection See Below Detection Equipment Required Install or modify new & existing systems Inspection & Testing 105.7.4 Fire Pumps 6 Related Equipment Final Inspection See Below Install or modify fire pumps, related fuel tanks, Required jockey pumps, controllers and generators Inspection & Testing 105.7.5 Flammable 6 Combustible Liquids Final Inspection 1. Install or modify a pipeline Required 1. $150.00 2. Install, construct or alter tank vehicles, 2. $150.00 equipment, tanks, plants, terminals, Inspection requirements wells, fuel dispensing stations, refineries, as defined by 2003 MSFC distilleries and similar activities where requirements. flammable or combustible liquids are produced, processed, transported, stored, dispensed or UGST or AGST storage 3. $200.00 used tank removal must be 3. Install, alter, remove, abandon, place witnessed by Fire temporarily out of service or otherwise Marshal. dispose of a flammable or combustible liquid tank 105.7.6 Hazardous Materials Final Inspection Install, repair damage to, abandon, remove, place Required $ 200.00 temporarily out of service, close or Required when hazardous substantially modify a storage facility or other materials in use or area regulated by MSFC Chapter 27 storage exceed amounts shown in MSFC Table 105.6.21 105.7.7 Industrial Ovens Final Inspection 1 5. 0 Installation of industrial ovens regulated by Required MSFC Chapter 21 MSFC requirements 1 5.7.8 LP Gas Fina Inspection 0.00 Installation of or modification to an LP Gas Required system MSFC & NFPA 56 requirements 105.7.9 Private Fire Hydrants Final Inspection 145.00 Installation of or modification of private fire Required hydrants Inspection & Tesing 10 .7.10 Spraying or Dipping Final Inspection 2 0. 0 Install or modify a spray room, dip tank or booth Required MSFC requirements 105.7.11 Standpipe System Final Inspection See Below Installation, modification, or removal from Required service of a standpipe system Inspection & Testing 105.7.12 Temporary Membrane Structures, Tents and Canopies Final Inspection 145.00 To construct an air-supported temporary membrane Required structure, tent (_> 200 ft2) or canopy (_> 400 MSFC requirements ft�). Fire Sprinkler, Fire Extinguishing Systems, Fire Alarm Systems or Standpipe Systems Fees for Automatic Fire Extinguishing Systems (MSFC 105.7.1); Fire Alarm, Detection and related equipment (MSFC 105.7.3); Fire Pumps or related equipment, (MSFC 105.7.4); and Standpipe Systems (MSFC 105.7.11) are calculated on project valuation from the 1997 UBC Permit Fee Schedule as shown below, plus the State of Minnesota Surcharge Fee on sprinkler permits: o � �uu.uu a�.s.�u - to S 2,000.00 $23.50 for the first 5500.00 plus 53.05 for each additional $100.00, or fraction thereof, to and �2 I_ _ _9rdinance No. Page 13 including $2000.00 -S 2001.00 to $ 25,000.00 69.25 for the first $2,000.00 plus $19.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, - - to and including $25,000.00 $ 25,001.00 to $ 50,000.00 $391.75 for the first 525,000.00 plus 510.10 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including 550,000.00 $ 50,001.00 to $ 100,000.00 $643.75 for the first 50,000.00 plus 7.00 for each additional $1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $ 100,000.00 Chapter 108 - Construction, Alteration, Modification or Installation Fees (Continued) - Fire Sprinkler, Fire Extinguishing Systems, Fire Alarm Systems or Standpipe Systems (Continued) Chapter � 108. Permitted Business Operations — Processes anctlqctivitie Permit Authority Fee $ 105.6.1 Aerosol products 145.00 $ 105.6.2 Amusement buildings 75.00 S 105.6.3 Aviation facilities 120.00 $ 105.6.4 Carnivals and fairs 200.00 $ 105.6.5 Battery systems 95.00 $ 105.6.6 Cellulose nitrate film 95.00 $ 105.6.7 Combustible dust-producing ops 200.00 $ 105.6.8 Combustible fibers 145.00 $ 105.6.9 Compressed gases 150.00 $ 105.6.10 Covered mall buildings 95.00 $ 105.6.11 Cryogenic fluids 95.00 $ 105.6.12 Cutting and welding 95.00 $ 105.6.13 Dry cleaning plants 145.00 $ 105.6.14 Exhibits and trade shows 200.00 $ 105.6.15 Explosives 200.00 $ 105.6.16 Fire hydrants and valves 75.00 13 :s Fees Ordinance No. Page 14 � $ 105.6.17 Flammable & Combustible liquids 200.00 $ 105.6.18 Floor finishing 95.00 $ 105.6.19 Fruit and crop ripening 120.00 $ 105.6.20 Fumigation & thermal insectcide fog 95.00 $ 105.6.21 Hazardous materials 145.00 $ 105.6.22 HPM facilities (Haz Prod Materials) 145.00 $ 105.6.23 High piled storage 200.00 $ 105.6.24 Hot work operations 95.00 $ 105.6.25 Industrial ovens 145.00 $ 105.6.26 Lumber yards & woodworking plants 200.00 $ 105.6.27 Liq or gas fueled veh/equip in Grp A 95.00 $ 105.6.28 LP Gas 95.00 $ 150.6.29 Magnesium 95.00 $ 105.6.30 Misc combustible storage 145.00 105.6.31 Open burning (Not allowed) NA $ 105.6.32 Open flames and candles 95.00 S 105.6.33 Organic coatings 145.00 $ 105.6.34 Places of assembly 135.00 $ 105.6.35 Private fire hydrants 75.00 14 - - � Ordinance No. - Chapter 108. Page 1 Permitted Business Operations - Processes and n,•t; v; ti ps Fees (Continued) Permit Authority Fee $ 105.6.36 Pyrotechnic special effects material 95.00 $ 105.6.37 Pyroxylin plastic 145.00 $ 105.6.38 Refrigeration equipment 95.00 $ 105.6.39 Repair garages or service stations 120.00 $ 105.6.40 Rooftop heliports 95.00 $ 105.6.41 Spraying or dipping 145.00 S 105.6.42 Storage of scrap tires/tire byproducts 120.00 $ 105.6.43 Temp mem struc, tents & canopies 95.00 $ 105.6.44 Tire-rebuilding plants 145.00 $ 105.6.45 Waste handling 200.00 $ 105.6.46 Wood products 165.00 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2004. ATTEST: Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: 15 Scott J. Lund, Mayor Ordinance No. 402.06. REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE TO CONNECTION Page 5 - After the initial connection has been made to the water service curb stop box or the sewer lead at the properiy line or a water service or sewer lead has been extended to the property line for connection, the applicant, owner, or the occupant or user of such premises shall be liable for all repairs required to any water line or any sewer lines necessary for connection of the premises from the ��3e main to the premises. ',' . If the nropertv owner requests maintenance services or repairs be performed by the City, the propertv owner shall be charged for the costs of the maintenance and/or repairs, includin� anv necessarv street repairs, at a rate set annuallv bv an administrative policy a°*�•--�=��a'�-�'''�°�*°�- ". It shall be the responsibility of the applicant, owner, occupant or user to perform standard maintenance of the sewer service line from the premises to the main including debris clearing or root cutting and to maintain the water service curb stop box for operabilitv and at such height as will ensure that it remains above the finished grade of the land or property. (Ref. 638, 1156) 402.07. CONSTRUCTION OF PRIVATE SEWER SYSTEMS PROHIBITED The constxuction of new individual sewage treatment systems (ISTS) is prohibited in the City of Fridley. Existing individual sewage treatment systems meeting MN Rules Chapter 7080 standards may and sha11 be permitted to continue in use and operation until system is deemed failing by a licensed inspector during a biennial inspection or the properiy owner expands kitchen, bathroom, or bedroom areas. The use of a cesspool, outside toilet, or any other individual sewage treatment system not meeting standards set forth in MN Rules Chapter 7080 is strictly prohibited. 1. New Construction. All new houses, buildings, businesses, facilities, etc., producing wastes or discharges must be properly connected to the City of Fridley sewer system. Application for connection shall be made to the City Building Department and a11 connection fees sha11 be paid as provided by City Ordinances. No building permit shall be issued by the City after the effective date of this ordinance, unless the applicant shows compliance with the terms of this ordinance. 2. Existing Structures. Any existing houses, buildings, business or facilities presently utilizing their own septic systems, drainfield, soil absorption system, etc., shall be inspected by November l, 2000 by a licensed inspector. After the initial inspection, systems must be inspected biennially by a licensed inspector and inspection results presented to the City of Fridley Building Department. All systems sha11 also be inspected prior to sale and/or transfer of title. All properties utilizing on site sewage treatment shall be connected to the City Sewer system prior to the issuance of any building pernuts for kitchen, bathroom, or bedroom expansions. Further, any such system presently in use, but which is revealed to be a failing system by inspection, shall be connected to the City of Fridley sewer system as soon as is practical but within 6 months of the time of failure. If the system is determined to be an immediate health hazard, the system must be connected immediately. ., � Ordinance No. Page 7 - ' �- Ordinance No. Page 1 - Chapter 108. Permitted Business Operations - Processes and - _ Activities Fees (Continued) 0 Permit Authority Fee $ 105.6.36 Pyrotechnic special effects material 95.00 $ 105.6.37 Pyroxylin plastic 145.00 $ 105.6.38 Refrigeration equipment 95.00 $ 105.6.39 Repair garages or service stations 120.00 $ 105.6.40 Rooftop heliports 95.00 $ 105.6.41 Spraying or dipping 145.00 $ 105.6.42 Storage of scrap tires/tire byproducts 120.00 $ 105.6.43 Temp mem struc, tents & canopies 95.00 $ 105.6.44 Tire-rebuilding plants 145.00 $ 105.6.45 Waste handling 200.00 $ 105.6.46 Wood products 165.00 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2004. ATTEST: Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk _ First Reading: Second Reading: Publication: 15 Scott J. Lund, Mayor r � CfTY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 TO: WILLIAM W. BURNS, CITY MANAGER��rY FROM: RICHARD D. PRIBYL, FINANCE DIRECTOR SUBJECT: 2"d READING REGARDING AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 402 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE DATE: March 4, 2004 Staff has made the changes that were identified during the 1�` Reading of Chapter 402 at the Council meeting of February 9, 2004. Staff has corrected the typos that occurred during the scanning process transforming this document into electronic media. As noted in my memo that accompanied the 1�` Reading, I have reviewed the various changes that are sustentative in nature versus updates or corrections that Staff has noted over the years Page 1. The items that have been modified are those that either add what Staff feels would be adding clarity or a correction of an incorrect reference to another section of the charter. Page 2. 402.04 Proportionate Share. Language being added here "Alternately, the City shall allow the owner to contract directly with an approved firm to install such connection and restoration subject to approval and inspection by the City." This language has been added to meet current City policy regarding allowing private contractors to connect new senrice lines to the City's water and sewer utilities instead of requiring that the City construct the connections. Page 3. 402.06 Repairs and Maintenance to connection. The changes made in this section are a change in City policy. In the past the City has been responsible for all repairs that were required from the property line to the main, including necessary street repairs. The change that Staff is recommending is to make the homeowner responsible for those repairs. If the property owner requests the City to do the maintenance or the repair, it will be done at a rate equal to the cost of the service that is being requested by the property owner. This change is similar to what a number of other cities have instituted regarding this activity. Another slight change in this section adds the words "for operability and" in regards to the water curb stop box. Our service technicians have found, that on occasion, when the water was to be shut off whether due to an emergency or upon request, the tube running down to the shut off was bent and had to be replaced in order to shut the water off. Page 4. Changes on this page are due to corrections of reference numbers. Page 5. This section starts the changes that remove the concept of new customers placing deposits on the water meters. This is old terminology that should have been removed 30 years ago when there was an attempt to change the concept from a deposit by the customer to a purchase of the meter. By statute anything that was defined as a deposit was to be paid interest during the period of the classification as a deposit. The new language removes the deposit language and requires the new owner to purchase a meter. This is only in the case of a new service or home, not an existing service or home that has been sold to a new owner. This removes the need to track each meter by address as ownership changes. For all of our utility customers that have purchased their meters in accordance with the past ordinance the City will refund or buy back their water meter upon the sale of their home. The new change would require the new owner of 16 ' Ordinance No. Page 2 -� the property to pay an amount to the City as a one time administrative fee for the new customer set up -" process. _ A new paragraph was also added regarding the right of entry to repair or replace the water meters. In the past, we have had some problems with owners that have had troublesome water meters. This section of the ordinance assists in providing authority for authorized Ciry representatives to enter the property to repair, replace or read the water meter. Page 6. The changes on this page work with the non payment of utility bills. It both clarifies and adds additional language regarding what occurs after four consecutive quarters of not reading the water meter. Due to the repetitive nature of this situation with some customers, there is a potential loss of revenue that could occur with both the water and sewer revenues. Staff felt that after four non-readings, a customer would be penalized in the amount of the cost of an automated meter reading device (AMR). Staff also feels that after the fourth quarter of not providing a water meter reading, a penalty of $50.00 per month should be assessed until the owner allows the City to install the new meter. Page 8. Staff added the storm water utility in the language to bring this section current with other sections of the City C�de. It also corrects a reference to another section of the ordinance. Page 9. Added clarification. � Page 10. Corrected reference Page 11. This page corrected a reference and struck all the language that pertained to the meter deposit that should have been removed 30 years ago. Page 72. Corrected numbering and added ctarification along with inserting a service charge as defined under an administrative policy, for those customers that request their meter be tested for accuracy. This fee will only be charged when, at the customers request, the testing is conducted and the meter tests normal. The normal range is defined within a range of —3% to +1 '/: %. If the reading is not within this range there will be no charge for testing and an adjustment will be made to the bill for the inaccurate reading. Page 13 � 14. These two pages only reflect changes made in the number of the sections due to the elimination of the meter deposit section. These changes are items that have appeared before you in other forms. They are a collaborative effort of the Finance Department, Engineering Department and the Water Department. It is felt that with these changes, Staff will be more efficient and effective in managing the daily activities of the Water, Sewer and Storm Water Utility. Staff recommends the second reading of this ordinance. RDP/me 17 Ordinance No. Page 3 - C� �_ 1 � `�7\ �� [�a AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 402. WATER AND SEWER ADMI1vISATRATION OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Fridley hereby finds, after review, examination and recommendation of staff, that Chapter 402, Water and Sewer Administration, of the Fridley City Code, be hereby amended and ordains as follows: FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 402. WATER, STORM WATER AND SANITARY SEWER ADMI1vISTRATION 402.01 CITY MANAGER RESPONSIBLE The City Manager in the City of Fridley shall have the responsibility of the management and operation of the municipal water system, sanitary sewer system and storm se�vve� water system in the City of Fridley. The City Manager sha11 have immediate control and custody of a11 properties, be responsible for their safekeeping and their proper storage and care, and shall provide for the keeping of a full and accurate record of all work done with respect thereto, the cost thereof, the names of persons employed, hours worked and such other information and records as may be required by the City Council. Further, the City Manager sha11 have immediate charge of a11 employees necessary to the operation of the said utilities of the City. (Ref. 113) 402.02. POLICY The City shall eliminate hazards to safety and health arising from defective water systems, sanitary sewer systems, and storm se�e� water systems in the City of Fridley; and for such purposes shall e�end its municipal or public sewers to all lands of the City and require connection of a11 failing Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) to said systems. 402.03. CONNECTION SERVICE No person shall make any type of connection to the municipal water system, the sanitary sewer system or the storm se� water system except upon making an application therefor on a form provided by the City and receiving a pernut issued by the City for such purpose. The application shall include an exact description of the property to be served, the uses for which the connection is requested and the size of the service lines requested or to be used. At the time of making such application, there shall be paid to the City a fee as designated in Sections 402.04, 402.05, and 48�:8�; 402.15, which shall be applied to, paid for, and received by the City for the purpose indicated. 18 " Ordinance No. Page 4 402.04. PROPORTIONATE SHARE No connection shall be made or continued in use at any time with respect to any sewer or water connection serving property if any person or occupants of the land, parcel or premises affected have not paid or provided for the payment of the full and proportionate share of the systems, services or improvements to be used as determined by the City Council, which share of the cost of said system, service or unprovement sha11 be payable as follows: A. For service to properry to which service lines have not been previously run from the street laterals to the properly line, the owner, occupant or user shall pay into the City Treasury (Water and Sewer Utility Fund) an amount not less than the cost of making connections, taps and installation of necessary pipe and appurtenances to provide service to the properiy and necessary street repairs. Alternatelv, the Citv shall allow the owner to contract directiv with an approved firm to install such connection and restoration subiect to anproval and inspection bv the City. B. For service to property to which service lines have been run previously to the property line but have not been paid for, the owner, occupant or user shall pay in cash or agree to pay charges in the form of Special Assessments to be levied against the property to be spread over a number of years coincident with the maturity requirements of any Special Improvement Bonds sold for the purpose of financing the construction of such water and sewer lines and service connections serving the property. Said cash payment or Assessment chazge sha11 be in principal amount not less than the payments made by or chazges placed against comparable properties for like services of such water or sewer, i.e. FOR AN "EQtTIVALENT LATERAL ASSESSMENT", or an amount as may be established by the City Couneil. In the instance of services run to the property lines as provided under Section 402.03.A, the payment to the City Treasury of any amount requued under Section 402.03.B sha11 be reduced by the amount paid to the City under Section 402.03.A. Payment to the City Treasury in the form of a Special Assessment charge shall be in the form of equal annual installments together with interest on the unpaid balance from yeaz to yeaz, which interest shall be computed at the current rate of assessment. 402.05. PERIVIIT FEE Prior to constructing or repair of any water or sewer line connecting the existing municipal system and any house or building for which the application is made, the owner or contractor sha11 be required to obtain a pernut for such connection, and shall pay a pemut fee as provided in Chapter 11 of this Code. After such connection has been made, the Water and Sewer Department shall be notified. It shall be unlawful to cover any connecting line until an inspection has been made and such connection and the work incident thereto has been approved by the City as a proper and suitable connection. 19 Ordinance No. 402.06. REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE TO CONNECTION Page 5 " After the initial connection has been made to the water service curb stop box or the sewer lead at the property line or a water service or sewer lead has been extended to the properiy line for connection, the applicant, owner, or the occupant or user of such premises sha11 be liable for all repairs required to any water line or any sewer lines necessary for connection of the premises from the �e�e main to the premises. -r-�, r; �, .�n �.o i:.,�.�o � r.,�i �_Y�� =_1,�°a �.�,,,_}ho ',' . If the nropertv owner requests maintenance services or repairs be performed bv the Citv, the propertV owner shall be charged for the costs of the maintenance and/or repairs, including anv necessarv street reuairs, at a rate set annuallv bv an administrative policv . It sha11 be the responsibility of the applicant, owner, occupant or user to perform standard maintenance of the sewer service line from the premises to the main including debris clearing or root cutting and to maintain the water service curb stop box for operabilitv and at such height as will ensure that it remains above the finished grade of the land or property. (Ref. 638, 1156) 402.07. CONSTRUCTION OF PRIVATE SEWER SYSTEMS PROHTBITED The construction of new individual sewage treatment systems (ISTS) is prohibited in the City of Fridley. Existing individual sewage treatment systems meeting MN Rules Chapter 7080 standards may and sha11 be permitted to continue in use and operation until system is deemed failing by a licensed inspector during a biennial inspection or the properry owner expands kitchen, bathroom, or bedroom areas. The use of a cesspool, outside toilet, or any other individual sewage treatment system not meeting standards set forth in MN Rules Chapter 7080 is strictly prohibited. New Construction. All new houses, buildings, businesses, facilities, etc., producing wastes or discharges must be properly connected to the City of Fridley sewer system. Application for connection shall be made to the City Building Department and all connection fees shall be paid as provided by City Ordinances. No building permit sha11 be issued by the City after the effective date of this ordinance, unless the applicant shows compliance with the terms of this ordinance. 2. Existing Structures. Any existing houses, buildings, business or facilities presently utilizing their own septic systems, dra.infield, soil absorption system, etc., shall be inspected by November l, 2000 by a licensed inspector. After the initial inspection, systems must be inspected biennially by a licensed inspector and inspection results presented to the City of Fridley Building Department. All systems sha11 also be inspected prior to sale and/or transfer of title. All properties utilizing on site sewage treatment shall be connected to the City Sewer system prior to the issuance of any building permits for kitchen, bathroom, or bedroom expansions. Further, any such system presently in use, but which is revealed to be a failing system by inspection, shall be connected to the City of Fridley sewer system as soon as is practical but within 6 months of the time of failure. If the system is determined to be an immediate health hazard, the system must be connected immediately. 20 - Ordinance No. Page 6 _-` 3. Abandoned Sewage Treatment Systems. All existing cesspools, drywells, sepric tanks, or any - other on-site sewage treatment systems which are abandoned and not in use shall be properly "- removed and/or filled immediately to Sta.te standards so as not to pose a danger to health and - safety. 402.08. NUISANCE Hereafter, whenever and wherever any such private septic tanlc, cesspool or other type of private sewage system is damaged or defective and as a result thereof operates improperly creating an immediate health threat by exposing raw sewage to the grounds surface, then except as is further provided herein, connection shall be made to a public sewer immediately. Use of a defective system, or one in need of repair to eliminate a hazard to safety or health is deemed maintenance of a nuisance and is prohibited; and such nuisance may be abated according to law. 402.09. FAILURE TO COMPLY; NOTICE The City Manager may cause written notice of sewer and water requirements to be given to any person required by subsection �n� no n� ,.,. nn� no 402.07 or 402.08 to make such repairs and connections. Such notice shall be mailed by certified mail or delivered by the Building Official or Code Enforcement Officer by order of the City Manager. In the event that (I.) any person, required by subsection 402.08.8� to connect an existing building to sanitary sewer mains where there is not an immediate health danger, fails to complete the making of such connection within 6 month after such written notice is given, or (11.) any person required by section 4A�:� 402.08 to connect an existing system to sanitary mains due to system failure and immediate health threat fails to complete the making of such connection with 5 days after the written notice is given, the Council may by resolution direct that the required connection be made and the cost assessed against the benefited property as set forth in section 4A�4 402.12. From the time of failure until connection, outflow must be plugged and tank pumped on a regular basis. Work must be done by a Certified septic installer and pumping schedules must be filed with Ciiy Building Department. 402.10. HEARING In any case where an owner deems himself or herself aggrieved by an order of the Building Official of the City or other representative of the City with respect to a private sewage disposal system and its continued use, the owner is entitled, upon giving notice and demand, to a hearing before the Council with respect thereto and before the order sha11 become final. Such notice and demand sha11 be made promptly and in no case later than five (5) days after receipt of any order from the City. 402.11. SEWAGE AND WASTE CONTROL The "Waste Discharge Rules for the Metropolitan Disposal System" as adopted by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES), is hereby adopted by reference and incorporated into and made a part of this Code as completely as if set out here in full. 21 Ordinance No. 402.12. INSTALLATION BY CITY Page 7 ' Wherever the notice provided for in Section 402.09 is not complied with, the Council may, by -� resolution, direct the connection of such building or property to the public sewer system. The cost of � a11 necessary appurtenances and the connection to public services sha11 be paid initially from the General Fund and then assessed by the Council against the property benefited. If the assessment is not paid to the City within ten (10) days after the City Clerk has served written notice in the same manner as provided for notice referred to in said section, the City Clerk shall certify the amount of the assessment to the County Auditor for collection in the same manner as other special assessments. The Council, by resolution, may provide for payment of the assessment in one (1) annual installment _ bearing interest at the current assessment rate from the expiration of such ten (10) day period. 402.13. STATE & METROPOLITAN COUNCIL REGULATIONS BY REFERENCE There is hereby adopted by reference, and shall be in full force and effect in the City of Fridley as if set out here in full, the following rules, regulations and recommended practices as set forth in pamphlets published by the State of Minnesota, rules, regulations and recommended pra.ctices which shall be considered and construed as minimum codes and standards of the City of Fridley: Rules, regulations and recommended practices for the design, conslruction and operation of sewage systems as set forth in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080, da.ted 1995, published by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, as amended to date. 2. Rules, regulations and recommended practices on the type, design, construction and location of wells for potable water supply when connections to the municipal water system aze not feasible as set forth in pamphlets entitled "Manual of Water Supply Sanitation", Section 11, dated 1956, Section V, dated 1956, and Section VII, dated 1957, all as published by the Minnesota Department of Health, Division of Environmental Sanitation, as amended to date. 402.14. CONSENT TO REGULATIONS Every person applying for water or sewer service and every owner of properly for which any such application is made shall be deemed upon making such application to consent to all rules, regulations and rates set forth in this Chapter, and such further rules, regulations and rates as may thereafter be set forth and adopted by the City Council. 402.15. WATER METER 1. Before any water conveyed through the municipal water system shall be used or utilized on the land or premises of any person, firm or corporation, there shall first be installed a water meter that will accurately measure the water consumed on the premises, except and unless such installation shall be exempted by the City. The applicant for water service shall deges�ke E�+t3�e�.�� pav an amount to the Citv at the time of application for permit as set forth above, an amount determined by the City to be sufficient to cover the cost of the meter. (Ref. , 566) _- - 22 - _ . Ordinance No. Page 6 2. At such time as there is a change of customer or pronertv ownershin for existin� customers, all new customers to the svstem will be required to pav a one-hme administrative set up charge at the rate set annuallv bv an admimstrahve Uo11Cy n i � ' +• - � � ��. ..�o.,... . . � r b � � , � � pmzrnsw°cuz?rc�cr.--tic� �� A. Those persons who naid to purchase a meter prior to the effective date of this ordinance mav have the purchase price returned uuon satisfactorv proof of transfer of title and possession of said premises The purchase price shall be first deducted from the bill if there are unpaid bills or charges. B. The liabilitv of the Citv for return of said purchase funds however shall be limited to the funds as are available in the water fund and shall not constitute a general obligation to the Citv. 3. All water meters installed under the provisions of this Chapter sha11 remain the property of the City of Fridley. The meters sha11 be repaired from time to time as is necessary to ensure accurate measuring of the flow of water. The City shall pay for the cost of repairs except when a meter has been damaged due to negligence on the part of persons other than employees of the Water �e. , Deuartment. The owner, occupant or user of the premises or such other person desiring use of the water sha11 reimburse the Water Deparlment for the expense of repairing any such damaged meter. Upon failure to reimburse the Water Department within a reasonable time and upon demand therefore, the water service and supply to said premises may be shut off or discontinued as determined to be in the best interest of the City. A Right of entrance Everv person owning imuroved real estate that has had a water meter installed shall allow dulv authorized emqlovees of the citv or a designated representative of the Citv, bearin� proper credentials and identification, to enter all properties for the purpose of reading, repairing, or replacin� the meter, or for the purqose of installing an automated meter readin� device (AMRI. 402.16. TAMPERING PROHIBITED It shall be unlawful for any person to tamper with, alter, by-pass or in any manner whatsoever interfere with the proper use and functioning of any water meter owned by the City. 402.17. METER READING AND PAYMENT FOR SERVICES l. The City may provide a system of water meter reading , , � deemed suitable �e-�e-�ese by the City Council. The City may also establish billing areas or districts and provide for the readings of ineters and billing charges by month, by ` calendar quarters or monthly quarters, or such periodic intervals as the City Council sha11 determine suitable and necessary from time to time to the needs of the City. In the case of a .- post-card meter reading, each consumer sha11 mail or return the meter card on or before the due a3 Ordinance No. Page 7 .-_ - date. 2. Each consumer sha11 be assessed a one dollar ($1.00) penalty for any card not returned within seven (7) days of the due date. 3. A charge of ten dollars ($10.00) will be added to the bill if the meter reading ,post card is not returned to the City for the second consecutive quarter billing. 4. A charge of fifteen dollars ($15.00) will be added to the bill if the meter reading pOSt card is not returned to the City for the third consecutive quarter. Such penalty and any use charges (based on an estimate of the water consumed) will be added to every quarterly billing thereafter if subsequently not read. 5. If the meter readins post card is not returned to the Citv for the fourth consecutive - uarter, an ARM shall be installed on the propertv The propertv owner shall pav a penaltv equal to the full cost of the meter and installation which will be added to the bill. If the plumbing is substandard, the propertv owner will be resnonsible for brin�ng the plumbing up to code at their own expense. A Refusal of Entrv Anv uerson refusing to allow entrv of a dulv authorized emqlovee or desi�nated representative, as described in 402.15.3.A., shall be required to nav a penaltv of $50 00 per month which shall be added to everv subsequent utilitv bill. The uenaltv shall be added everv month until the pronertv owner is in comphance with this section. �: 6. The water rate charges sha11 be considered net charges and sha11 be the charges payable after the last day of the month or billing period in which the billings are sent out. b- 7. Payments not paid within thirty (30) days from the date of the bill will be assessed an additional ten percent (10%) penalty. (Ref. 662, 988) 402.18. DISCONTINUANCE OF SERVICE The City reserves the right to discontinue service to any customer of the water and sewer system without notice when necessary for repairs, additional connection or reconnection or for non-payment of charges or bills or for disregard of any rules or regulations in connection with the use or operation of said system. Whenever any service has been discontinued for non-payment of charges or bills or for disregard of any rules or regulations, it shall not be resumed, except upon payment of the charges of bills accrued together with compliance with the rules or regulations �+�, ., .,., „� �.,o a„n,,..� iec nm previously violated and payment to the City of a restoration fee W�.��, , set annuallv bv an administrative uolicv + "' r'''°"+"" " . (Ref. 565) �� " Ordinance No. _ - l 402.19. LIEN Page 10 '- In the event a water or sewer bill is unpaid at the end of the calendar quarter or the billing period - under which the billing is sent out, the bill shall be considered delinquent and the service may be discontinued as provided in Section 4A�� 402.18 above and the City Council may cause the charges noted in such billing to become a lien against the properry served by certifying to the County the amount of said delinquent bill in accordance with Minnesota Sta.tutes, Chapter 444. A penalty of ten percent (10%) will be assessed to a11 amounts certified to the County for collection. (Ref. 113 and 565) 402.20. WATER= � SEWER, AND STORM WATER RATES 1. Water consumption, � sewer, and storm water use charges to the consumer shall become due and payable quarterly each year on a calendar schedule or by monthly intervals or periods of time in accordance with a schedule prepared by the City Manager. (Ref. 464) 2. The water rates per quarter shall be set by Council Resolution. 3. The sewer rates per quarter sha11 be set by Council Resolution. 4. The storm water rates per quarter shall be set bv Council Resolution 4. 5. Whenever the period of billing of charges for e�ke� water, e� sewer. or storm water services e�-�e�s are altered or changed, the minimum chazge payable for such water1 e� sewer, or storm water service may and shall be prorated as necessary in equity to the consumer for any period of time less or more than a full quarter of any period used. Such prorating is also authorized whenever the rate, minimum or otherwise, for e�e� water, e� sewer, or storm water services, ^-�'�� are charged. 402.21. DEFECTIVE METER If a meter fails to register or accurately measure the water, the charge for water consumed shall be paid for at the established rate based upon past average billings as determined by the City Manager. 402.22. NOTICE OF LEAK Any owner, occupant or user of a premises who discovers a leak in a service line to the premises sha11 notify the Water Department within 24 hours. Any water wasted due to failure of such person to comply with this regulation sha11 be estimated by the City Manager and charged against the owner of such premises at the established rate. (Ref. 113) 25 Ordinance No. 402.23. STOP VALVE Page 11 " There shall be installed in every connection to the City water system one stop and waste valve -- which shall be installed at a point between the water service stop and the meter so that the water - may be turned off and the meter and house plumbing entirely drained. There sha11 be installed another stop and waste cock in the pipe on the house side of the meter. All service pipes connected to the City systems sha11 be of a TYPE K copper or its approved equal and shall be laid at a depth not less than 6.5' below the finished grade, or as low as the street mains. 402.24. PERMIT Any applicant, owner, occupant or user in applying for permission to connect to the City water and sewer systems sha11 have all work in connection therewith performed under the supervision of a plumber, licensed to do plumbing in the City of Fridley, except that nothing in this Chapter sha11 be construed as to prohibit an individual owner from obtaining a permit therefor provided that a person, firm or corporation actually performing the work be a plumber licensed to perform such work in the City. 402.25. OPEN CONNECTION FOR FIRE PROTECTION Any applicant, owner, occupant or user who sha11 apply for a connection to the City water mains which connection shall be open at all times for the purpose of fire protection, shall apply in writing to the Water Department giving detailed information as to the size of main required, location of main and a copy of the plans of the system that shall be served by such connection. Such applicant shall furnish and install between the point of connection to the City main, a shut off valve or if the same be installed by the City, the cost thereof shall be paid by the said applicant. Such shutoff valve shall at all times be open for inspection purposes to the Water Department personnel, but maintenance and cost of repair of the valve and tap shall be the sole responsibility of the applicant desiring such service. In the event a single connection is made for the joint purpose of fire protection and potable water use, applicant shall split the connection line and provide sepazate shut off valves for each use, a minimum distance of 20 feet from the outermost point of the building. Such permit may be granted by the City upon such conditions as may be deemed by the City Council to be in the best interest of the City including requirement by the Ciiy of the installation of any valve and meter for water use detection purposes. 402.26. RESTRICTION It shall be unlawful for any person, fiim or corporation having such an open main for the purpose of the protection to make any connection to such main for any purpose other than the one noted in the original request to the Water Department. 402.27. CITY NOT LIABLE The City shall not be held liable at any time for any deficiency or failure in the supply of water to the customer whether the same be occasioned by shutting off the water for repairs or connections, _ y- or for any cause whatsoever. � � ' Ordinance No. r 402Z8. RATES Page 12 The City Council sha11 have the authority to prescribe the rates to be charged for water and sewer service to the customer from time to time and may prescribe the date of billing, a discount for the payment of any bill within a reasonable time, and such further rules and regulations relative to the use and operation of such systems as it may deem necessary from time to time. 402.29. INDUSTRIAL USER STRENGTH CHARGE 1. Recitals. The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES), a metropolitan commission organized and existing under the laws of the Sta.te of Minnesota (the "MCES"), in order to receive and retain grants in compliance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 and regulations thereunder (the "Act"), has determined to impose an industrial user sewer strength charge upon users of the Metropolitan Disposal System, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.121, Subdivision 24, and to recover operation and maintenance costs of treatment works attributable to the strength of the discharge of industrial waste, such sewer strength charge being in addition to the charge based upon the volume of discharge. In order for the City to pay such costs based upon strength of industrial discharge allocated to it each year by the MCES it is hereby found, determined and declared to be necessary to establish sewer strength charges and a formula for the computation thereof for a11 industrial users receiving waste treatment services within or served by the City. Furthermore, Minnesota Statutes, Section 444.075, Subdivision 3, empowers the City to make such sewer chazge a charge against the owner, lessee, occupant or all of them and certify unpaid charges to the County Auditor as a tax lien against the property served. 2. Establishment of Strength Charges. For the purpose of paying the costs allocated to the City each year by the MCES that are based upon the strength of discharge of a11 industrial users receiving waste treatment services within or served by the City, there is hereby approved, adopted and established, in addition to the sewer charge based upon the volume of discharge, a sewer charge upon each company or corporation receiving waste treatment services within or served by the City, based upon strength of industrial waste discharged into the sewer system of the City (the "Strength Charge"). 3. Establishment of Strength Charge Formula. For the purpose of computation of the Strength Charge esta.blished by Section 48�� 402.29.2, there is hereby established, approved and adopted in compliance with the Act the same strength charge formula designated in Resolution No. 76-1972 adopted by the governing body of the MCES on June 15, 1976, such formula being based upon pollution qualities and difficulty of disposal of the sewage produced through an evaluation of pollution qualities and quantities in excess of annual average base and the proportionate costs of operation and maintenance of waste treahnent services _ _ provided by the Commission. 27 Ordinance No. Page 13 " -. _ 4. Strength Charge Payment. � - It is hereby approved, adopted and established that the Strength Charge established by Section - n n� 402.29.2 above shall be paid by each industrial user receiving waste treatment services and subject thereto before the twentieth (20th) day next succeeding the date of billing thereof to such user by or on behalf of the City, and such payment thereof sha11 be deemed to be delinquent if not so paid to the billing entity before such date. Furthermore, it is hereby established, approved and adopted that if such payment is not paid before such da.te an industrial user shall pay interest compounded monthly at the rate of two-thirds of one percent (2/3%) per month on the unpaid balance due. _ 5. Establishment of Ta�c Lien. As provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 444.075, Subdivision 3, it is hereby approved, adopted and established that if payment of the Strength Charge established by Section 48�� 402.29.2 above is not paid before the sixtieth (60th) day next succeeding the date of billing thereof to the industrial user by or on behalf of the City, said delinquent sewer strength charge, plus accrued interest established pursuant to Section 4A�.?� 402.29.4, sha11 be deemed to be a charge against the owner, lessee and occupant of the properry served, and the City or its agent shall certify such unpaid delinquent balance to the County Auditor with taxes against the property served for collection as other taxes are collected; provided, however, that such certification sha11 not preclude the City or its agent from recovery of such delinquent sewer strength charge and interest thereon under any other available remedy. (Ref. 629) .� i „�_ • �. �� Y. .I-�l:ts_ �. r. ■_ e e �•] Ordinance No. Page 14 � - - - - -- - - 402.30�. TAMPERING It shall be unlawful for any person to tamper with, use, alter or damage any water line or connection of any type or part thereof or any fire hydrant, water service curb or valve box or street valves or any sewer line or connection of any type or part thereof without authority from the City. Any person who shall damage any part of the municipal water system, or any pipe or connection of any type or part thereof, including any hydrant or valve, or any part of the municipal sewer system or any pipe or connection of any type or part thereof, shall be liable for the damage or loss to the City caused thereby. 402.31�. SURFACE WATER INTO SA1vITARY SEWER It sha11 be unlawful for any owner, occupant or user of any premises to direct into or allow any s�s�age surface water to drain into the sanitary sewer system of the City of Fridley. 402.32�. CITY INSPECTION All installation work or repair of connections to the municipal sewer and water system, including grades, bends and back-filling shall be performed under the direction and supervision of the City Manager or the City Manager's designee. No work shall be covered or back-filled until directed by the City Manager or the City Manager's designee. All work and excavations shall be protected by barricades and warning markers and lights reasonable and suitable to the purpose. The City shall be held harmless of any claim or loss as might otherwise arise for damage or loss of injury caused by or arising by reason of such work being performed; and the applicant, owner or user performing or causing such work to be done sha11 give a report to the City with respect thereto. 2. No digging on any permanent type street sha11 be pernutted except by special permission from the City. 3. Whenever a water user questions the accuracy of the meter, and desires that such meter be tested, such person sha11 °��°�� ° �'^"° �'Q`.^^' reimburse the citv for all testin� costs nlus an administrative fee set annuallv bv an administrative nolicv if the meter tests accurate within a range of minus three percent (-3%) to plus one and one half percent (1-1/2%). If it is not accurate within this range, no charge will be made for testing and anv administrative costs incurred. a� An �radjustment on the water bill will be made for the period of time that the meter is assumed to be inaccurate. 402.334. WATER CON5ERVATION _ In order to ensure an adequate water supply for human consumption, sanitary purposes, and fire -�- fighting purposes, the City Council may establish by resolution water conservation regulations as they may be required from time to time. (Ref. 922) 29 Ordinance No. 402.34�. TERNIINATION NOTICE Page 15 �_ Requests for turning off the water sha11 be made in writing thirly (30) days prior to the time for which payment has been made. Otherwise, the owner of the premises shall be liable for water rent for the next period. 402.35b. INSPECTION & CORRECTION The City Manager or any authorized employee or agent of the City shall have right to enter and be admitted to any lands and properry in the City for the purpose of inspection of materials, plumbing work and fixtures of all kinds used by or in connection with the water and sewer systems. Any and all work, construction, alteration, repair, addition to, remodeling, moving, use, maintenance and occupancy of any building and the work and installation of any utility and appliance thereof and in use therewith to which the codes herein referred to apply shall be done and performed strictly in accordance with this Code. If, after inspection, any of the same are found not to be in accord with this C�ode, then the same shall be corrected upon notice from any duly authorized representative of the City of Fridley authorized to give such notice. If, after such written notice to any person performing any work which requires correction thereof, such person neglects or refuses to correct such work and fails to make the same conform to this and to the order of the City's representative, the City by any of its duly authorized representatives may remove such work and charge the cost thereon to the person installing the same. No person shall cover any such work without the same being first duly inspected. 402.36�. SEPARATION FROM PRIVATE WATER Whenever any premises are connected to the municipal water system, there shall be maintained a complete physical sepazation between the municipal water supply system and the private water supply system, so that it is impossible to intentionally or unintentionally allow any water produced by a private system to be introduced into the supply line from the municipal system. 402.378. CHARGES WHERE NOT METERED Any water obtained by any person, firm or corporation from the municipal water system which is not paid for by the consumer or the user thereof by payment of water charges or rates determined by a meter shall be chazged at and paid for by such consumer or user upon an estimate of the quantity of water used as computed at the established rate for such purpose or use, except that the Council may waive payment of such charge where deemed by the Council to be in the interest of the City. 402.38s}. ENFORCEMENT It shall be the duty of such administrative personnel as designated by the City Manager to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Chapter. 30 Ordinance No. 402.394A. PENALTIES Page 1 Any violation of this Chapter is a misdemeanor and is subject to a11 penalties provided for such violations under the provisions of Cha.pter 9 of this Code. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2004. ATTEST: Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk First Reading: Second Reading: Published: 31 Scott J. Lund, Mayor � � CfTY QF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 Date: March 3, 2004 To: William Burns, City Manager c�� From: Subject: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Ron Julkowski, Building Official Second Reading - Chapter 206, Building Code M-04-38 INTRODUCTION The attached ordinance officially adopts the International Building Code, the National Electrical Code, and numerous State building related code sections. The ordinance also adopts an associated fee schedule for plan review and the various permits. Though you are being asked to officially endorse this Code option, it is a mandatory act that all cities must do. For municipalities, there is no alternative to adoption of the State/International Building Code. At their February 23, 2004, City Council meeting, Council requested corrections of several typographical errors and also the Mayor pointed out that the language regulating manufactured, or modular homes and deleting reference to mobile homes. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends second reading adoption of the proposed ordinance in order to officially adopt Chapter 206, and by reference Minnesota Rules 1306 with options Subp 3 and E1. Staff also recommends approval of the modified fee schedule as submitted. M-04-38 32 _ � _� _-. � ORDINANCE NO. - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 206. BiJILDING CODE ADOPTING THE 2001 NIINNESOTA STATE BUII,DING CODE THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY ORDAIN THAT CHAPTER 206 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE IS HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS: 206.01. BUILDING CODE 206. BUII.DING CODE � 1. Building Code. The Minnesota State Building Code, established pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 16B.59 through 16B.75 �:�, one copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk of Fridley, Minnesota, is hereby adopted by reference as the Building Code of the City of Fridley and incorporated in this Chapter as completely as if set out here in full. 2. The following chapters of the Minnesota State Building Code including the following chapters of Minnesota Rules are adopted by the City: A. Chapter 1300 - Minnesota Building Code. B. Chapter 1301 - Building Official Certification. C. Chapter 1302 - State Building Construction Approvals. D. Chapter 1303 — Minnesota Provisions; E�. Chapter 1305 - Adoption of the 2000 International '°o' T'~:F .-.�, Building Code ' e� E�s: !1\ 2 T' T Tlete„t;..« .,.,.i !'`..,..-e,.t:..,,..1 ��..:l;tis.. � .,..... �� ,....,.�"".,'- �'— ------------- - f71 17 T'.,:..:.... TT C'.,,,.,rl T_�...,....�:�.. .. /''...,s,..,l � e � !2\ 7 G De��4:.,za � /�\ 1� Tl'. T C 1 .i Tl � �TITOTIO YfZ�IIGT� ! ! ! - F�. Chapter 1306 - Special Fire Protection Systems (Ord 1159) Section 1306 0020. Municipal Option, Subp. 3; and E.1 G�. Chapter 1307 - Elevators and Related Devices • H Chapter 1309 — Adoption of the 2000 Intemational Residential Code: I Chapter 1311 — Adoption of the 2000 Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Existin� _ BuildinQS; JC. Chapter 1315 — Adoption of the 2000 � National Electrical Code _` K�. Chapter 1325 - Solar Energy Systems L�. Chapter 1330 - Fallout Shelters 33 Ordinance No. Page 2 �-, _ M3. Chapter 1335 - Floodproofing Regulations -_- - �. ��3�e`F��v � at:«;e� F �+1..� u...,a;,.......e.7 _ - ......,.. �.,. ... �a»-.�-.,_rr-- N Ch�ter 1341— Minnesota Accessibilitv Code O�. Chapter 1346 —Adoption of the Minnesota Staxe '°°' T T�� -^� Mechanical Code P�: Chapter 1350 - Manufaciured Homes Q�. Chapter 1360 - Prefabricated Buildings RA. Chapter 1361 - Industrialized/Modulaz Building S�. Chapter 1370 - Storm Shelters T� Chapter 4715 - Minnesota Plumbing Code . LT#. Chapters 7670, 7672, 7674, 7676 and 7678, Minnesota Energy Code � n a ;..+....�:,,., n..+;�.,�t n.....e,..a:,.e„ v , ..........,. � r�.,...+e,- � znc mm� �„�......+ �. rc. ...p..�. �.,.,.,....,_.. .._...r_...--- � 22 L' . ...�:..,, ..�..7 ('_��.a;.,r. � 34. Organization and Enforcement. A. Avplication Administration and Enforcement. The application, administration and enforcement of the code shall be in accordance with Minnesota Rule Chanter 1300. The code shall be enforced within the extraterritorial limits pernutted bv Minnesota Statutes 16B.62, Subd. 1, when so established by this ordinance. B. The Building Inspection Division shall be the Building Code Department of the City of Fridley. The Administrative authority shall be a State Certified Building Official. (Minnesota Statute 16B.65) C. The City Manager shall be the Appointing Authority and designate the Building Official for the jurisdiction of Fridley. (Ref. 961) 206.02. CONFLICTS In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this Code adopted by the provisions of this Chapter and applicable provisions of State law, rules or regulations, the latter shall prevail. 206.03. PERMITS AND FEES 1. The issuance of permits, and collection of fees shall be as authorized in Minnesota Statute 16B.62 _- subdivision 1 a�'�� a "a a�^' :^ �'�'^^*°' t"� }t,° 7 O(�'7 T T.,:c �.,., a,.:ia:.,.. r„ae ...,a y r o �� , . . . � •-- n - 34 _ _ Ordinance No. Page 3 2. Violations and Penalties. A violation of the code is a misdemeanor (Minnesota Statute 16B.69) and � - Minnesota Rules Chapter 1300. The fee schedules shall be as follows: A. Plan Review Fees. (1) When a plan or other data are submitted for review, the plan review fee shall be 65% of the buildi��nernut fee. ��-� ��`=}erv�o '' n ''� ;'' "+ +'' +• o '' •'�; ' `' b Y ;�....+'., � F e (2) Where plans are incorporated or changed so as to require additional plan review an additional plan review fee shall be charged. (3) Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation and plans and other data. submitted for review may thereafter be returned or destroyed. The building official may extend the time for action by the applicant once for a period not exceeding 180 days upon request by the applicant. (4) Permit and Plan Review Refund Policv The Buildin� Official mav authorize refundine of anv fee hereunder which was erroneousl�vaid or collected The Buildin� Official mav authonze refunding of not more than 80% of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this code The Buildin¢ Official mav authonze refizndm� of not more than 80% of the plan review fee�aid when an annlication for a nernut for wluch a plan review fee has been Qaid is withdrawn or cancelled before anv vlan reviewin� is done, The Building Official shall not authorize refizndin� of anv fee vaid except on wntten avvlication filed bv the ori�inal pernutee not later than 180 davs after the date of the fee Pa� Y- ' ' ' ' � ' ' " " " _ ' _ _ _ , _ 1• - • � B. Building Permit Fees. (Ref. 901) TOTAL VALUATION .......................FEE $ 1.00 to $ 500.00 ............................. $23.50 $ 501.00 to $2,000.00 .......................... $23.50 for the first $500.00 plus $3.05 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00 $ 2,001.00 to $25,000.00 .....................$69.25 for the first $2,000.00 plus $14.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 ....................$391.25 for the first $25,000.00 plus $10.10 for each - additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 ..................$643.75 for the first $50,000.00 plus $7.00 for each ` additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 35 Ordinance No. Page 4 " $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 ................ $993.75 for the first $100,000.00 plus $5.60 for each -^ additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 -- $500,001.00 to $1,400,000.00 .............$3,233.75 for the first $500,000.00 plus $4.75 for each additional $1,000.00 or fi-action thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001.00 and up ...........................$5,608.75 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $3.15 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof Other Inspections and Fees: Inspections outside of normal business hours .............................................. $50.00 4?:9A per hour* (minimum charge - two hours) Re-inspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 108.8 .................. $50.00 4��A per hour* Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated ................................ $50.00 4-�:A9 per hour* (minimum charge — one half hour) Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to .... $50.00 4�8A per hour* Approved plans (minimum charge — one half hour) *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved. For use of outside consultants for plan checking and inspections, or both ............... Actual Costs** Residential Mobile Home Installation .......................................................................... $100.00 �A�A Surcharge On Residential Building Permits. A surcharge of $5.00 shall be added to the permit fee chazged for each residential building pernut that requires a State licensed residential contractor. **Actual costs include administrative and overhead costs. C. Plumbing Permit Fees. (Ref. 901) FEE Minimum Fee $15.00 or 5% of cost of improvement, whichever is eater ��8 Each Fixture .................................................. $10.00 �AA Old Opening, New Fixture ........................... $10.00 4�8 Beer Dispenser ..............................................$10.00 Sr.AA Blow Off Basin ............................................. $10.00 �:9A Catch Basin .......................:........................... $10.00 �AA Rain Water Leader ........................................ $10.00 �98 Sump or Receiving Tank .............................. $10.00 �8A Water Treating Appliance ..........................$35.00 �A:9A Water Heater-Electric ................................... $35.00 �.BA Water Heater-Gas .......................................$35.00 �A:89 Backflow Preventer ............................................... $15.00 OTHER ................................... Commercial 1.25% �o of value of fixture or appliance 36 _ _ Ordinance No. Page 5 Other Inspections and Fees: Inspections outside of normal business hours . ............................................. $50.00 4?�A per hour* (minimum charge - two hours) Re-inspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 108.8 ................. $50.00 4�AA per hour* Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated ................................. $50.00 4'�A9 per hour* (minimum charge — one half hour) Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to....... $50.00 4�AA per hour* Approved plans (minimum charge — one half hour) *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved. For use of outside consultants for plan checking and inspections, or both ............... Actual Costs** **Actual costs include administrative and overhead costs. D. Mechanical Permit Fees. (Ref. 901) FEE (1) Residential Minimum Fee $15 00 or 5% of cost of im,_provemen� whichever is Qreater ��A Furnace...............................................$35.00 �:BA GasRange .................................................... $10.00 GasDryer ..................................................... $10.00 GasPiping .................................................... $10.00 Air Conditioning ..........................................$25.00 OTHER .......................... 1% of value of appliance (2) Commercial Minimum Fee .....................................$35.00 ��r.99 All Work ................... 1.25% of value of appliance Other Inspections and Fees: Inspections outside of normal business hours ............................................... $50.004�88 per hour* (minimum charge - two hours) Re-inspection fees assessed under provisions of Section 108.8 ................... $50.0()4�A8 per hour* Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated .................................. $50.004'�:9A per hour* (minimum charge — one half hour) Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to........ $50.0047�8 per hour* - Approved plans (minimum charge — one half hour) 37 Ordinance No. Page 6 " *Or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, whichever is the greatest. This cost shall include -. supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees involved. -" For use of outside consultants for plan checking and inspections, or both ............... Actual Costs** **Actual costs include administrative and overhead costs. E. Electrical Permit Fees. (1) PaymentofFees 0 All electrical inspection fees are due and payable to the City of Fridley at or before commencement of the installation and shall be forwarded with the request for inspection. (2) Fee Schedule Fees shall be paid according to the following schedule: (a) Minimum Fees. ((1))Residential. Minimum fee for each separate inspection of an installation, replacement, alteration or repair limited to one (1) inspection only ...................... $20.00 Minimum fee for installations requiring two inspections shall be ........................ $40.00 (Ref. 901) ((2)) Nonresidential. Minimum fee for each separate inspection of an installation, replacement, alteration or repair limited to one (1) inspection only ...................... $25.00 Minimum fee for installations requiring two inspections shall be ....................... $50.00 (b) Services, changes of services, temporary services, additions, alterations or repairs on either primary or secondary services shall be computed sepazately. 0 to and including 200 ampere capacity ................................................................. $30.00 For each additional 100 ampere capacity or fraction thereof ................................. $ 8.00 (c) Circuits, installations, additions, alterations or repairs of each circuit or subfeeder shall be computed separately including circuits fed from subfeeders and including the equipment served, except as provided for in (a) through (i). 0 to and including 100 ampere capacity .................................................................. $ 6.00 For each additional 100 ampere capacity or fraction thereof ................................. $ 4.00 ((1)) Maximum fee on a single family dwelling shall not exceed $85.00 if not over 200 ampere capacity. This includes service, feeders, circuits, fixtures and equipment. This maximum fee includes not more than two 2€e�{� inspections. 38 _ � Ordinance No. Page 7 ((2)) Maximum fee on an apartment building shall not exceed $35.00 per dwelling unit for the first 40 units and $30.00 per dwelling unit for the balance of units. The fee - for the service and feeders in an apartment building shall be in accordance with 2b and 2c of the schedule, and shall be added to the fee for circuits in individual apartments. The maximum fee for an apart�nent applies only to the circuits in the apartment. A two-family unit (duplex) maximum fee per unit as per single family dwelling. (Ref. 901) ((3)) The maximum number of 0 to 100 ampere circuits to be paid on any one athletic field lighting standard is ten (10). (Ref. 901) ((4)) The fee for mobile homes shall be in accordance with 2b and 2c of the fee schedule. (Ref. 901) ((5)) In addition to the above fees: ((a)) A charge of $2.00 will be made for each lighting standard. ((b)) A charge of $3.00 will be made for each traffic signal standard. Circuits originating within the standard will not be used when computing the fee. ((6)) In addition to the above fees, all transformers and generators for light, heat and power shall be computed separately at $5.00 per unit plus $3.00 per 10-Kilovolt amperes or fraction thereof. ((7)) In addition to the above fees, all transformers for signs and outline lighting shall be computed at $5.00 per unit .(Ref. 901) ((8)) In addition to the above fees (unless included in the maximum fee filed by the initial installer) remote control, signal circuits and circuits of less than 50 volts shall be computed at $6.00 per each ten (10) openings or devices of each system plus $.50 for each opening. (d) For the review of plans and specifications of proposed installations, there shall be a minimum fee of $100.00, up to and including $30,000 of electrical estimate, plus 1/10 of 1% of any amount in excess of $30,000 to be paid by persons or firms requesting the review. (e) When re-inspection is necessary to deternune whether unsafe conditions have been conected and such conditions are not subject to an appeal pending before the Board or any court, a re-inspection fee of $25.00 for residenrial and $30.00 for nonresidential, may be assessed in writing by the inspector. (Ref. 901) ( fl For inspections not covered herein, or for requested special inspections or services, the fee shall be $50.00 �?A8 per hour, including travel time, plus $.40 per mile traveled, _ plus the reasonable cost of equipment or material consumed. This Section is also -_ applicable to inspection of empty conduits and such other jobs as detemiined by the City. (Ref. 901) 39 Ordinance No. Page 8 � _ (g) For inspection of transient projects including but not limited to camivals and circuses, the inspection fees shall be computed as follows: (Ref. 901) - ((1)) Power supply units, according to 2B of the schedule. A like fee will be required on power supply units at each engagement during the season, except that a fee of $50.00 �?9A per hour will be charged for additional time spent by the inspector, if the power supply is not ready for inspection at the time and date specified on the request for inspection as required by law. (Ref. 901) ((2)) Rides, devices, or concessions, shall be inspected at their first appearance of the season and the inspection fee shall be $25.00 per unit. In addition to the fee for the power supply units, there shall be a general inspection for each engagement during the season at the hourly rate, with a two-hour minimum. In addition to the above fees, inspections required on Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or after regular business hours will be at the hourly rate, including travel time. An owner of a migratory amusement enterprise shall notify the inspector and make application for inspection a minimum of 14 days before its engagement in Fridley. When the inspector is not notified at least 48 hours in advance, a charge of $100.00 will be made in addition to all required fees. (h) For purposes of interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter, the most recently published edition of the National Electrical Code shall be prima facie evidence of the definitions, interpretations and scope of words and terms used in this Chapter. (i) In addition to the above fees, the inspection fee for each separate inspection of a swimming pool shall be computed at $25.00. Reinforcing steel for swimming pools requires a rough-in inspection. (3) Minor Repair Work Defined. Minor repair work as used in Minnesota Statutes, Section 326.244 shall mean the adjustment or repair and replacement of worn or defective parts of electrical fixtures, switches, receptacles and other equipment provided that such minor repairs are made in compliance with accepted standards of construction for safety to life and property as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 326.243 and do not require replacement of the wiring to them. The City's inspectors or agents may inspect any such minor repairs at the request of the owner or person making such repairs. (4) Condemnation of Hazardous Installations. When an electrical inspector finds that a new insta.11ation or part of a new installation that is not energized is not in compliance with accepted standards of construction as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 326.243 Safety Standards of the Minnesota Electrical Act, the inspector shall, if the installation or the noncomplying part thereof is such as to seriously and proximately endanger human life and property if it was to be energized, order with the approval of the Building Inspector, immediate condemnation of the installation or noncomplying part. When the person responsible for making the installation condemned hereunder is notified, they shall promptly proceed to make the corrections cited in the condemnation order. (Ref. 901) 40 prdinance No. (5) Disconnection of Hazazdous Installation: If while making an i.nspection, the electrical inspector finds that a new installation that is energized is not in compliance with accepted standards of construction as required by Minnesota Sta.tutes, Section 326.243 Safety Standards of the Minnesota Electrical Act, the inspector shall, if the installation or the noncomplying part tbereof is such as to seriously and proximately endanger human life and properiy, order iinmediate diSCOnIIeCtiOA of the installation or noncomplying part. When the person responsible for making the installation ordered disconnected hereunder is notified, they shall promptly proceed to make the corrections cited in thi.s disconnect order. (Ref. 901) (6) Corrections of Noncomplying Installations. When a noncomplying installation whether energized or not, is not proximately dangerous to human life and property, the inspector shall issue a correction order, ordering the owner or contractor to make the installation comply with accepted standards of construction for safety to life and properly, noting specifically what changes are required. The order of the inspector shall specify a date of not less than 10 nor more than 17 calendar days from the date of thc order. F. Moving of Dwelling or Building Fee. The permit fee for the moving of a dwelling or building shall be in accordance with the following schedule: For Principle Building into Ci ........... $ 300.00 ty ................................................................................. .......... $ 42.00 For Accessory Building into City ................................................................................•.......... $ 20.00 For Moving any building out of City ..................................................................................... $ 20.00 For moving through or within the City ........................................................................ G. Wrecking Permit Fee. (1) For any permit for thc wrecking of any building or portion thereo� the fee charged for each such building included in such permit shall bo based on tbe cubical contents thereof and shall be at the ra.ta of one dollaz and twenty-five cents ($1.25) for each one thousand (1000) cubic feet or fra.ction thereof. (2) For structtires which would be impmctical to cube, the wrecking permit fee shall be bascd on the total cost of wrccking such structuro at the rate of six dollars ($6.00) for each five hundred dollars ($500.00) or fraction thereof. (3) In no case shall the fee charged for any wrecking perrnit bo less than twenty dollars ($20.00). 41 Ordinance No. Page 10 -_ . H. Water and Sewer Fees. (Ref. 901) Hydrant Rental Agreement - Service Charge .......................................................................... $50.00 (for use of hydrant only - City does not supply hose e�e�e�) Water Usage Metered ....................................................................$ 1.25 �-:AA/1,000 gallons used Minimum....................................................................................................... $10.00 Tanker........................................................................................................... $10.00 per fill Water Taps .................................$400.00 plus cost per square foot for the area to be restored. Permanent Street Patch — First5 sq. yds ........................................................................................................ $300.00 Over5 sq. yds ........................................................................................ $30.00 per sq.yd. Temporary Street Patch (Nov. 1 through May 1) First5 sq. yd . ............................................................................................... $400.00 Over5 sq. yd .................................................................................................. $40.00 per sq. yd. plus cost of permanent street uatch Water Meter Repair - Weekend & Holidays ......................................................................... $125.00 WaterCotu�ections Permit ............................................................................................. $50.00 �3-A9 Sewer Connections Permit ......................................................................................... $50.00 �3-A8 Sewe�-9-Bap�e� ......................................................................................................................... Q3-0o Inspection Fee for Water/Sewer Line Repair .......................................................................... $40.00 I. Land Alterations, Excavating, or Grading Fees including Conservation Plan Implementation Fees. (Ref. 901,1012) 50 cubic yards or less ....................................................................................................................... $40.00 51 to 100 cubic yards ....................................................................................................................... $47.50 101 to 1,000 cubic yards .................................................................................................................... $47.50 for the first 100 cubic yards plus $10.50 for each additional 100 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards ............................................................................................................ $167.00 for the first 1,000 cubic yards plus $9.00 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards ........................................................................................................ $273.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards plus $40.50 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 100,001 cubic yards or more .......................................................................................................... .$662.50 for the first 100,000 cubic yards plus $22.50 for each additional 100,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. �� _ - Ordinance No. Land Alteration Plan-Checking Fees: Page 11 50 cubic yards or less ....................................................................................................................... No Fee 51 to 100 cubic yards .......................:................................................................................................ $23.50 101 to 1,000 cubic yards .................................................................................................................... $37.00 1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards ............................................................................................................... $49.25 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards ........................................................................................................... $49.25 for the first 10,000 cubic yards plus $24.50 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 100,001 to 200,000 cubic yards ....................................................................................................... $269.75 for the first 100,000 cubic yazds plus $13.25 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. 200,001 cubic yards or more ........................................................................................................... $402.25 for the first 200,000 cubic yards plus $7.25 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof. J. Pollution Monitoring Registration Fee. (Ref. 929, 94'n l. Each pollution monitoring location sha11 require a site ma.p, description and length of monitoring time requested. (For matter of definition pollution monitoring location shall mean each individual tax parcel.) There shall be an initial application and plan check fee of Twenty-Five Dollars ($25). 2. The applicant for a Pollution Control Registration shall provide the City with a hold harniless statement for any damages or claims made to the City regarding location, construction, or contaminates. An initial registration fee of Fifly Dollars ($50) is due and payable to the City of Fridley at or before commencement of the installation. 4. An annual renewal registration fee of Fifly Dollars ($50) and annual monitoring activity reports for all individual locations must be made on or before September first of each year. If renewal is not filed on or before October first of each year the applicant must pay double the fee. A fmal pollution monitoring activity report must be submitted to the City within (30) days of ternunation of monitoring activity. (Ref. 961) 206.04. INVESTIGATION FEES Should any person begin work of any kind such as hereinbefore set forth, or for which a permit from the Building Code Deparhnent is required by this Chapter without having secured the necessary pemut therefore from the Building Code Department either previous to or during the day where such work is commenced, or on the next succeeding business day when work is commenced on a Saturday, Sunday or a holiday, they _ shall, when subsequently securing such pemut, be required to pay an investigation fee equal to the permit fee and shall be subject to all the penal provisions of said Code. (Ref. 901) 43 Ordinance No. Page 12 206.05. REINSPECTION FEE A re-inspection fee of f� €�� dollars ($50.00 4'�A8) per hour shall be assessed for each inspection or re-inspection when such portion of work for which the inspection is called for is not complete or when conections called for are not made. (Ref. 901) 2. This Section is not to be interpreted as requiring re-inspection fees the first time a job is rejected for failure to comply with the requirements of this Code, but as controlling the practice of calling for inspections before the job is ready for such inspection or re-inspection. Re-inspection fees may be assessed when the pemut cazd is not properly posted on the work site, or the approved plans are not readily available for the inspection, or for failure to provide access on the date and time for which inspection is requested, or for deviating from plans requiring the approval of the Building Official. 4. Where re-inspection fees have been assessed, no additional inspection of the work will be performed until the required fees have been paid. (Ref. 961) 206.06. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Except for single family residential structures, a Certificate of Occupancy stating that all provisions of this Chapter have been fully complied with, shall be obtained from the City: A. Before any structure for which a building pernut is required is used or occupied. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued when the building is approved for occupancy but the outside development is partially uncompleted. (Ref. 901) B. Or before any nonconforming use is improved or enlarged. 2. Application for a Certificate of Occupancy shall be made to the City when the structure or use is ready for occupancy and within ten (10) days thereafter the City shall inspect such structure or use and if found to be in confomuty with all provisions of this Chapter, shall sign and issue a Certificate of Occupancy. 3. A Certificate of Compliance shall be issued to all existing legal nonconforming and conforming uses which do not have a Certificate of Occupancy after all public health, safety, convenience and genera.l welfare conditions of the City Code are in compliance. 4. No pernut or license required by the City of Fridley or other governmental agency shall be issued by any department official or employee of the City of such governmental agency, unless the application for such permit or license is accompanied by proof of the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Compliance. 5. Change in Occupancy: A. The City will be notified of any change in ownership or occupancy at the time this change occurs _ for all industrial and commercial structures within the City. _-• B. A new Certificate of Occupancy or Compliance will be issued after notification. A thirty-five � dollar ($35.00) fee will be assessed for this certificate. -� 44 -- Ordinance No. Page 13 -_� 6. Existing Structure or Use: - A. In the case of a structure or use established, altered, enlarged or moved, upon the issuance and receipt of a Special Use Permit, a Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued only if all the conditions thereof shall have been satisfied. B. Whenever an inspection of an existing structure or use is required for issuance of a new Certificate of Occupancy, a thiriy-five dollar ($35.00) fee will be charged. If it is found that such structure or use does not conform to the applicable requirements, the structure or use shall not be occupied until such time as the structure or use is again brought into compliance with such requirements. 206.07. CONTRACTOR'S LICENSES 1. It is deemed in the interest of the public and the residents of the City of Fridley that the work involved in building alteration and construction and the installation of various appliances and service facilities in and for said buildings be done only by individuals, firms and corporations that have demonstrated or submitted evidence of their competency to perform such work in accordance!with the applicable codes of the City of Fridley. ; 2. The pemuts which the Building Inspector is authorized to issue under this CQde shall be issued only to individuals, firxns or corporations holding a license issued by the City for wbrk to be performed under the pernut, except as hereinafter noted. 3. Requirements. Application for license shall be made to the Building Code Department and such license shall be granted by a majority vote of the Council upon proof of the applicant's qualifications thereof, willingness to comply with the provisions of the City Code, filing of certificates evidencing the holding of public liability insurance in the limits of $50,000 per person, $100,000 per accident for bodily injury, and $25,000 for properly damages and certificates of Worker's Compensation insurance as required by State law and if applicable, list a Minnesota State Tax Identificarion number. (Ref. 901) 4. Fee. The fee for each license required by the provision of this Section shall be thiriy-five dollars ($35.00) per year. 5. Expiration. All licenses issued under the provisions of this Section shall expire on April 30th, following the date of issuance unless sooner revoked or forfeited. If a license granted hereunder is not renewed previous to its expiration then all rights granted by such license shall cease and any work performed after the expiration of the license shall be in violation of this Code. 6. Renewal. Persons renewing their license issued under this Section after the expirarion date shall be charged the full annual license fee. No prorated license fee shall be allowed. 45 Ordinance No. Page 14 7. Specific Trades Licensed. - Licenses shall be obtained by every person engaging in the following businesses or work in accordance -- with the applicable Chapters of the City of Fridley. - A. General contractors in the business of nonresidential building construction and residential contractors with an exempt card from the State. B. Masonry and brick work. C. Roofmg. D. Plastering, stucco work, sheetrock taping. E. Heating, ventilation and refrigeration. F. Gas piping, gas services, gas equipment installation. G. Oil heating and piping work. H. Excavations, including excavation for footings, basements, sewer and water line installations. I. Wrecking of buildings. J. Sign erection, construction and repair, including billboards and electrical signs. K. Blacktopping and asphalt work. L. Chimney sweeps. M. Sanitarv Sewer Service and lateral cleanin�. 8. Employees and Subcontractors. A license granted to a general contractor under this Section shall include the right to perform all of the work included in the general contract. Such license shall include any or all of the persons performing the work which is classified and listed in this Code providing that each person perfoiming such work is in the regular employ and qualified under State law and the provisions of this Building Code to perform such work. In these cases, the general contractor shall be responsible for all of the work so performed. Subcontractors on any work shall be required to comply with the Sections of this Code pertaining to license, insurance, permit, etc., for their particular type of work. (Ref. 901) 9. Suspension and Revocation Generally. The City Council shall have the power to suspend or revoke the license of any person licensed under the regulations of this Section, whose work is found to be improper or defective or so unsafe as to jeopardize life or property providing the person holding such license is given twenty (20) days notice and granted the opporiunity to be heard before such action is taken. If and when such notice is sent to the legal address of the licensee and they fail or refuse to appear at the said hearing, their license will be automatically suspended or revoked five (5) days after date of hearing. 10. Time of Suspension. When a license issued under this Section is suspended, the period of suspension shall be not less than thiriy (30) days nor more than one (1) year, such period being determined by the City Council. 1 l. Revocation, Reinstatement. . When any person holding a license as provided herein has been convicted for the second time by a court of law for violation of any of the provisions of this Code, the City Council shall revoke the - license of the person so convicted. Such person may not make application for a new license for a - period of one (1) year. 46 " Ordinance No. Page 15 " 12. Permit to Homeowner. - The owner of any single family property may perform work on properiy which the owner occupies so long as the work when performed is in accordance with the Codes of the City and for such purpose a permit may be granted to such owner without a license obtained. All rental property pernuts shall be obtained by licensed contractors. 13. State Licensed Contractor's Excepted. Those persons who possess valid State licenses issued by the State of Minnesota shall not be required to obta.in a license from the City; they shall, however be required to file proof of the existence of a valid State license together with proof of satisfactory Worker's Compensation and Public Liability insurance coverage. (Ref. 901) 14. Public Service Corporations Excepted. Public service corporations shall not be required to obtain licenses for work upon or in connection with their own property except as may be provided by other Chapters. 15. Manufacturers Excepted. Manufacturers shall not be required to obtain licenses for work incorporated within equipment as part of manufacturing except as may be provided by other Sections of this Code. 16. Assumption of Liability. This Section shall not be construed to affect the responsibility or liability of any party owninS, operating, controlling or installing the above described work for damages to persons or property caused by any defect therein; nor shall the City of Fridley be held as assuming any such liability by reason of the licensing of persons, firms or corporations engaged in such work. 206.08. UTILITY EXCAVATIONS (SEWER & WATER) 1. Pernut Required. Before any work is performed which includes cutting a curb or excavation on or under any street or curbing a pernut shall be applied for from the City and shall pav a permit fee as arovided in Chapter 11. The Public Works Department shall verify the location of the watermain and sanitary sewer connections before any excavation or grading shall be permitted on the premises. The permit shall specify the location, width, length and depth of the necessary excavation. It shall further state the specifications and condition of public facility restoration. Such specifications shall require the public facilities to be restored to at least as good a condition as they were prior to commencement of work. Concrete curb and gutter or any street patching shall be constructed and inspected by the City, unless specified otherwise. 2. Deposit - Required. A. Where plans and specifications indicate that proposed work includes connection to sanitary sewer, watermain, a curb cut or any other disruption that may cause damage to the faciliries of the City, the application for permit shall be accompanied by a two hundred dollar ($200.00) cash deposit as a guarantee that all restoration work will be completed and City facilities left in an undamaged condition. B. The requirement of a cash deposit shall not apply to any public utility corporation franchised to , do business within the City. 47 Ordinance No. Page 16 3. Ma�cimum Deposit. - No person shall be required to have more than four hundred dollars ($400.00) on deposit with the City -� at any one time by reason of this Section; provided that such deposit shall be subjected to compliance - with all the requirements of this Section as to all building permits issued to such person prior to the deposit being refunded. 4. Inspections. A. Before any backfilling is done in an excavation approved under this division the City shall be notified for a review of the conditions of construction. B. During and after restoration the City Engineer or a designated agent shall inspect the work to assure compliance. (Ref. 901) 5. Return of Deposit. The Public Works Director shall authorize refundment of the deposit when restoration has been completed to satisfactory compliance with this Section. 6. Forfeiture of Deposit. Any person who fails to complete any of the requirements shall forfeit to the City such portion of the deposit as is necessary to pay for having such work done. 206.09. BUILDING SITE REQUIREMENTS General. In addition to the provisions of this Section, all building site requirements of the City's Zoning Code Chapter 205 and additions shall be followed before a building permit may be issued. 2. Utilities and Street Required. No building permit shall be issued for any new construction unless and until all utilities are installed in the public street adjacent to the parcel of land to be improved and the rough grading of the adjacent street has been completed to the extent that adequate street access to the parcel is available. Manufactured Home �� Prohibitions. Except in a manufactured home �a�le� or manufactured �e home park, the removal of wheels from any manufactured home � or the remodeling of a manufactured home �a�le� through the construction of a foundation or the enclosure of the space between the base of the manufactured home � and the ground, or through the construction of additions to provide extra floor space will not be considered as confornung with the City's Building Code in any respect and will therefore be prohibited. 4. Equipment and Material Storage. No construction equipment and/or material pertaining to construction shall be stored on any property within the City without a valid building pernut. When construction is completed and a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued, any construction equipment or materials must be removed within thirty (30) days from the issuance date on the Certificate of Occupancy. _. � 48 ,_ � Ordinance No. Page 17 5. Construction Work Hours. -- It shall be unlawful for any person or company acting as a contractor for payment, to engage in the " construction of any building, structure or utility including but not limited to the making of any excavation, clearing of surface land and loading or unloading materials, equipment or supplies, anywhere in the City except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on Saturdays . However, such activity shall be lawful if an alternate hours work pernut therefore has been issued by the City upon application in accordance with requirements of the paragraph below. It shall be unlawful to engage in such work or activity on Sunday or any Legal Holiday unless an alternate hours work pernut for such work has - first been issued. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to prevent any work necessary to prevent injury to persons or property at any time. 6. Alternate Hours Work Permit. Applications for an alternate hours work pemut shall be made in writing to the Public Works Director and shall state the name of the applicant and the business address, the location of the proposed work and the reason for seeking a permit to do such work, as well as the estimated time of the proposed operations. No such permit shall be issued excepting where the public welfare will be harmed by failure to perform the work at the times indicated. Safeguards. Warning barricades and lights shall be maintained whenever necessary for the protection of pedestrians and traffic; and temporary roofs over sidewalks shall be constructed whenever there is danger from falling articles or materials to pedestrians. 206.10. DRAINAGE AND GRADING 1. Investigation. After a building permit has been applied for and prior to the issuance of said permit, the City shall thoroughly investigate the existing drainage features of the properiy to be used. 2. Obstruction of Natural Drainage Prohibited. No building pernut shall be issued for the construction of any building on which construction or necessary grading thereto shall obstruct any natural drainage waterway. Undrainable Lands. No building permit shall be issued for the construction of any building upon ground which cannot be properly drained. 4. Protection of Existing Drainage Installations. _ A. Where application is made for a building permit and subsequent investigation shows that the property to be occupied by said building is adjacent to a portion of a public road or street containing a drainage culvert, catch basin, sewer, special ditch or any other artificial drainage structures used for the purpose of draining said property and/or neighboring property, the applicant shall specifically agree in writing to protect these waterways in such a way that they shall not be affected by the proposed building construction or grading work incidental thereto. 49 Ordinance No. Page 18 " B. No land shall be altered and no use shall be permitted that results in water run-off causing flooding, erosion or deposits of minerals on adjacent properties. Stormwater run-off from a developed site will leave at no greater rate or lesser quality than the stormwater run-off from the site in an undeveloped condition. Stormwater run-off shall not exceed the rate of run-off of the undeveloped land for a 24-hour storm with a 1-year return frequency. Detention facilities shall be designed for a 24-hour storm with a 100-year return frequency. All run-off shall be properly channeled into a storm drain water course, ponding area or other public facility designed for that purpose. A land alteration pernut shall be obta.ined prior to any changes in grade affecting water run-off onto an adjacent properiy. Order to Regrade. The City may order the applicant to regrade property if existing grade does not conform to any provision of this Section, if the grade indicated in the preliminary plan has not been followed, or if the grade poses a drainage problem to neighboring properties. 206.11. WATERS, WATERWAYS Defmition. As used in this Section, the term waters and/or waterways shall include all public waterways as defined by Minnesota Statutes, Section 105.38 and shall also include all bodies of water, natural or artificial, including ponds, streams, lakes, swamps and ditches which are a part of or contribute to the collection, runoff or storage waters within the City or directly or indirectly affect the collection, transportation, storage or disposal of the storm and surface waters system in the City. 2. Pernut Required. No person shall cause or pemut any waters or waterways to be created, dammed, altered, filled, dredged or eliminated, or cause the water level elevation thereof to be artificially altered without first securing a pemut from the City, State or watershed management organization as appropriate. Application for Permit. Applications for permits required by the provisions of this Section shall be made in writing upon printed forms fumished by the City Clerk. 4. Scope of Proposed Work. Applications for pemuts required by this Section shall be accompanied with a complete and detailed description of the proposed work together with complete plans and topographical survey map clearly illustrating the proposed work and its effect upon existing waters and water handling facilities. Fees. A fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) shall be paid to the City and upon the filing of an application for a pernut required by the provisions of this Section to defray the costs of investigating and considering such application. 206.12. PENALTIES Any violation of this Chapter is a misdemeanor and is subject to all penalties provided for such violations under the provisions of Chapter 901 of this Code. ,�- 50 Ordinance No. Page 19 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS _ DAY OF 2003. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN, CITY CLERK First Reading: February 23, 2004 _ Second Reading: Publication: 51 SCOTT J. LUND, MAYOR � L GTY OF FRIDLEY Date: To: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 2004 March 4, 2004 William Burns, City Manager ,��" From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Ron Julkowski, Building Official Deb Skogen, City Clerk Subject: Summary Ordinance for Changes to Chapter 206, Building Code M-04-39 INTRODUCTION The attached summary ordinance summarizes the ordinance that officially adopts the International Building Code, the National Electrical Code, and numerous State building related code sections. The ordinance also adopts an associated fee schedule for plan review and the various permits. Due to the enormous expense of publishing the entire 14- page ordinance, staff is recommending publication of this summary ordinance, while providing the information that the entire Ordinance is available for public review during normal business hours at the Fridley Municipal Center, 6431 University Avenue NE, Fridley, MN 55432. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends adoption of the proposed summary for publication in order to publish o�cially adopted Chapter 206 in its entirety, and by reference Minnesota Rules 1306 with options Subp 3 and E1, and the associated modified fee schedule as submitted. 52 I. II. I1� ORDINANCE NO. OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY Title AN ORDINANCE RECODIFYIl�IG THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE, CHAPTER 206, ENTITLED "BUILDING CODE", BY AMENDING SECTIONS 206.01.01, 206.01.02, 206.01.03, 206.03.01, 206.03.02, 206.03.03, 206.04, 206.05.01, 206.07.07, 206.09.02, AND 206.09.05 Summary The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows: That Chapter 206 of the code of ordinances of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, entitled "Building Code" is hereby amended to adopt by reference the 2000 Minnesota State Building Code, the International Building Code, the National Electrical Code, amendments to referenced State Rules Chapter 1306, and certain state amended rules and appendices. The ordinance also adopts the state recommended schedule of fees for building pernuts, electrical permits, moving pernuts, wrecking pernuts, investigation and inspection fees. Water and sewer fees and land alteration pernut plan check fees are also increased. Finally the ordinance adopts the Notice This Title and Summary have been published to clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the City of Fridley's Building Code. 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 N.E., Fridley, MN 55432. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THE 8� DAY OF MARCH, 2004. _ ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK First Reading: Second Reading: - Publication: February 23, 2004 March 8, 2004 March 18, 2004 53 SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR CITY OF FRIDLEY _ PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ' -_ FEBRUARY 18, 2004 - CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Savage called the February 18, 2004, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Barb Johns, Larry Kuechle, Dave Kondrick, Diane Savage, Dean Saba LeRoy Oquist, Brad Dunham Others Present: Stacy Stromberg, Planner Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Rick Harrison, Site Design Studio, 8832 7th Ave. N., Golden Valley Pete Villard, Architectural Works-Villard, 5770 Blackshire Path, Inver Grove Heights Michael Spack, TDI Inc., 1313 5th Street SE, Minneapolis Ken and Pat Christiansen, 7525 4th Street Steve Oltman, 7542 5"' Street Gregory Zelenak, 7526 4th Street Barbara Edwards, 1403 64t" Avenue Kurt and Andrea Olson, 1385 64th Avenue J& R Rusinak, 6412 Piece Street Jesse Colllard, 1426 64�' Avenue Aimee Stanford, 1426 64th Avenue Russell and Beverly Prior, 1340 Mississippi Street Herb and Judy Lennox, 1464 Rice Creek Road Joe and Linda Nelson, 1357 64th Avenue Shanti Van Buren, 7550 4`h Street Roland and Karen Evans, 7558 4th Street Virgil and Susan Okeson, 1423 64th Avenue Mr. and Mrs. Frank DeMello, 6134 Woody Lane Robert Tumms, 1346 Hillcrest Drive Harold Johnson, 1334 Hillcrest Drive Garland and Jane Lagesse, 7951 Broad Avenue Tim Byrne, 6053 Woody Lane Mark and Jean Swartz, 1372 64th Avenue Joan Olson, 6320 Van Buren Street Mark Mattison, 6421 Central Avenue - Donna Reisner, 6424 Pierce Street Daryl Wolf, 6446 Arthur Street _ Doreena Aisewski, 7534 4th Street Terry Miller, Vandias Heights Sue Rau, 1341 64ih Avenue Inge Eyler, 1456 64th Avenue Kevin and Paulette Holman, 571 79th Way Flo Jackson, Spring Lake Park School District `_ John Zurek, Spring Lake Park School District � John Kvidera, 7517 4th Street 54 Plannin Commission Meeting February 18, 2004 Page 2 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 7. 2004 MOTION made by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the January 7, 2004 minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Rezoning, ZOA 04-01, by Profitmax Inc., to rezone multiple properties from C-1, Local Business, C-2, General Business and R-1, Single Family Residential, to S-2, Redevelopment District, for the purpose of redevelopment, to allow for a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex, generally located at 1340 and 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 and 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 and 1357 64'h Avenue, and two vacant lots, Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat, PS #04-01, by Profitmax Inc., to replat six parcels into two parcels, for the purpose of constructing a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex, generally located at 1340 and 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 and 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 and 1357 64th Avenue, and two vacant lots, Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition. MOTION made by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to open both public hearings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:35 P.M. Ms. Stromberg stated that John DeMello of Profitmax, Inc., is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to construct 71 senior owner-occupied condominium units and a retail complex on the southwest corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. Ms. Stromberg stated that John DeMello, is requesting to create two new parcels, from 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant), 1341 64�' Avenue and 1357 64'n Avenue. The petitioner is also requesting a rezoning for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64'h Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential � zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. - Ms. Stromberg stated that Mr. DeMello is proposing to construct a 13,420 square foot retail complex on the north portion of the development. Mr. DeMello envisions that this complex will house neighborhood retail businesses, which may include a pharmacy, a coffee shop, an ice cream/sandwich shop and a hair salon. The retail complex will include at least 67, 10 foot wide parking stalls for customers. The proposed 71 units will be owner-occupied and comprised of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units. The development will include 73 underground parking stalls and 30 -� surface parking stalls. The petitioner plans to model the exterior of both projects after an Italian villa. The site will include several ponds, a gazebo, and a trail system with landscaping that . surrounds the property. 55 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 3 ` Rezoninq Ms. Stromberg stated that the petitioner is requesting a rezoning and master plan approval for -' the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64th Avenue. Currently, there is - a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. Ms. Stromberg stated that rezoning a property to S-2 Redevelopment District, requires that the accompanying site plan become the master plan for the site. If the rezoning and master plan were approved by the City Council any modification of the site plan would need to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Review of the master plan would also need to be completed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority as the property is in a Redevelopment District. Ms. Stromberg stated the City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. State Statute gives the City the authority to "rezone" property from one designated use to another, so long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000 and is a"tool infended to he/p guide future growth and development of the community...lt is a p/an because it contains goa/s, policies and strategies that all work together, looking fo the fufure and working towards achieving a community wide vision" In order for a rezoning to be viewed favorably, it must be in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed retail complex, senior owner-occupied condominium complex and rezoning of the properties meet several of the objectives the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the Comprehensive Plan. The area of Old Central between Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road was identified.as an area for future redevelopment. The purpose of redeve/opment is to provide the opportunity for more efficient land uses and eliminate inefficient /and uses and under utilized parcels. Redevelopment can also provide an opporfunify fo build new facilities, meet current market demands and desires of the City, creates new tax base, and creates additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the rezoning of these properties. Ms. Stromberg stated that the Comprehensive Plan specifically states that for this portion of Old Central, "considerafion shou/d be made to replacing the current mix of single-family residential and commercial uses with higher density residential development that fogether with the health club may serve as an attractive residenfial location for move-up housing°. Ms. Stromberg stated that the Comprehensive Plan also states that for projects in these redevelopment areas requiring rezoning that the S-2 zoning designation "would be the appropriate Zoning district fo implement for the redevelopment project. The intent of the district is to provide the City with site p/an review authority to determine if the proposed project meets the goa/s and objectives of fhe City's Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plans". Ms. Stromberg stated that as Fridley's residents continue to age, demand will increase for "empty nester" and senior housing. There will be an increased demand for senior rental, senior owned condominium/town homes, and assisted living facilities. The proposed project, 71 senior owner-occupied condominium units, will meet some of the current demand for those seniors _� - seeking alternatives to their current housing type. �� __ _ Planning Commission Meeting February 18, 2004 _ Page 4 - Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request ZOA #04-01 and accompanying site plan for the senior building and retail complex, with the following stipulations. _ • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ■ Provides housing oppartunities for seniors. • Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. ■ Provides additional job opportunities in Fridley 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A-5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64'h Avenue, and 1357 64th Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run-off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13. A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in � association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on - the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. -' 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be pre pared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat , approval. 57 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Pa e 5 " Plat Ms. Stromberg stated that Mr. DeMello is also seeking to replat the properties located at 1314 -' Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 - Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue, 1341 64�' Avenue and 1357 64th Avenue to create two separate lots. One of the newly created lots will accommodate the retail complex and the other lot will be used to allow for the construction of a 71-unit owner occupied senior condominium development. Ms. Stromberg stated that the proposed Lot #1 will accommodate the 13,420 square foot retail complex. Retail complexes like the one proposed are typically zoned C-2, General Business. Proposed Lot #1 is 62,690 square feet in size, which exceeds the minimum lot area requirement for the C-2, General Business District. Proposed Lot #1 also meets all the parking requirements for the number of parking stalfs required for a retail use. Ms. Stromberg stated that the proposed Lot #2 is approximately 116,658 square feet (2.68 acres) in size. The petitioner is proposing to construct 71 senior owner occupied condominium units. The development will include 73 underground parking stalls and 30 surface parking stalls. Because of the underground parking and the high water table in this area, the height of the building will be 45 feet at the midspan. Ms. Stromberg stated early discussions with Anoka County indicated they anticipate that a 120 ft. right-of-way corridor will be required for both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersections in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and 10 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. Due to necessity of right-of-way acquisition, the parking setback for the retail space will be 2 feet from the north and west property lines. The parking setback on the senior condominium complex will also be 2 feet from the west property line. Due to the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setbacks can be recognized under this rezoning master plan approval. Ms. Stromberg stated that the petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc., to complete a Market Feasibility Study for Senior Housing in Fridley. The demographic and competitive market analysis done by Maxfield indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 189 for-sale housing units. Ma�eld's research pointed out that given the competitive situation in the marketplace, the quality of the subject site, and the lack of for-sale product within three miles of the property, the senior condominium project would be the most marketable product for the site. Their research also showed that the subject site could best support an age-restricted owner- occupied development such as a condominium or cooperative of around 70 units. Ms. Stromberg stated the City's Comprehensive Plan indicated that in 2001, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed senior condominiums carried 8,000 vehicles per day and, at this traffic level, was only carrying 57% of the traffic for which the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates Old Central carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2020, based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles / day, Old Central will be carrying 71 °/a if the maximum amount of traffic for which the roadway was designed. Ms. Stromberg stated that Profitmax Inc., hired TDI, Traffic Data Incorporated, a Data � Collection, Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning firm to perform a traffic analysis. , The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published -- ' 58 __ ` Pianning Commission Meeting February 18, 2004 Page 6 _-� in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7�' Edition, which was published in December 2003. The consultants used the SeniorAdult Housing Attached category in the ITE manual to determine "- that the proposed senior complex would generate a total of 247 trips per day. The consultants � used the Specialty Retail Center category from the ITE manual and determined that the proposed retail complex would generate a total of 598 trips per day. Ms. Stromberg stated that TDI developed traffic forecasts for the following 2005 scenarios: ➢ No Build (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Elderly Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) ➢ Build Spring Valley Estates (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Elderly Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) The finding of these forecasts show that the level of service at both the Central Avenue/64tn Avenue intersections and the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersections would remain the same in the no-build or build scenarios. Ms. Stromberg stated that in order for TDI to complete the traffic study, the consultants also referred to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which governs the use of traffic control devices per Minnesota State Statute. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has eight criteria (called warrants) to consider when determining if a traffic signal should be installed at an intersection or not. These warrants are primarily based on the traffic volumes flowing through the intersection. A warrant analysis was conducted for the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. To complete this analysis, TDI staff performed a turning movement count from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. None of the eight warrants are met under the existing conditions, nor will they be met if the elderly housing and retail buildings are constructed on the proposed site. According to this anatysis, a traffic signal should not be installed at the intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue until at least one of the warrants is being met. Ms. Stromberg stated that the conclusions of TDI's analysis state that the stop controlled approaches at the Central Avenue/64t'' Avenue intersection operate at LOS C or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic control. The intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue will operate at LOS D or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic controls. A traffic signal is not currentty warranted at the intersection and a traffic signal will not be warranted at the intersection after the proposed development is completed. Ms. Stromberg stated that the petitioner has been working with the Rice Creek Watershed to determine in the project area has a wetland. The petitioner has hired Tom Bremen, with Acorn Consulting, to delineate the site for any possible wetlands. Currently, both the petitioner and the Rice Creek Watershed are waiting for the delineators report. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner has indicated that their intentions are to build the entire 71 unit senior owner-occupied condominium project in one construction phase. If the bank required unit pre-sales are slower than predicated, then they plan to phase the project in 2 phases. The first phase would be 35 units and the second phase would be the remaining 36 units. Phase one would commence upon selling the bank required percentage of units in the first half of the building, removal of the existing homes and soil corrections and would tentatively commence in August 2004. Phase two would commence when the pre-sales are met for the '_ first part of the 2"� half of the building. In the meantime, sod, landscaping, and parking would be installed. Phase 3 involves the retail space which would simultaneously, work with the , residential property. When the building is completely leased, the building will be constructed. 59 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 7 Ms. Stromberg stated that during the public hearings for the senior condominiums for Town Center Development, City staff heard many comments from neighboring property owners. Some of the concerns raised were regarding traffic and a guarantee that the tenants of the complex would be 55 or older. To alleviate those concerns ahead of time, the petitioner has provided city staff with a traffic study and a copy of the proposed association documents upon submittal of the rezoning and plat request. Ms. Stromberg stated that staff also heard a concern regarding a drainage issue on properties south of 64th Avenue. Reviewing history showed that improvements have been made to the storm sewer system north of 64th Avenue and that all the storm water from the north is diverted west to the much larger storm sewer system in Central Avenue. There is no connection between the storm sewer system north and the problem identified from the resident south of 64`n Avenue. City Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat number PS#04-01, with the following stipulations. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A-5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64�' Avenue, and 1357 64th Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run-off and management. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. .� ' Planning Commission Meeting February 18 2004 Page 8 -� 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in - association documents and filed with the County with final plat. - 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located - on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approvaL Mr. Saba asked if the petitioner at some point wanted to convert to regular condominiums what would he have to do? Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner would need to go back to the Planning Commission and the City Council for an amendment to the master plan. Mr. DeMello stated there are 4 reasons that this project is good for the City of Fridley. 1. The site currently is not developed due to challenges in combining eight lots, correcting poor soil, dealing with a wetland, streamlining inconsistent zoning,. Removing existing housing and correcting incorrect survey information on each of the Iots. 2. The demand in this area only supports senior housing and retail they may patronize 3. Community that have implemented similar plans have experienced tremendous revitalization in both 4. The most compelling reason is that senior residents in Fridley deserve to own a state- of-the-art building that enables them to reduce costs and burden of home up-keep at a competitive price. Mr. DeMello introduced his dream team: Mr. Rick Harrison who is responsible for the site design, Mr. Charlie Scarpol a builder with years of experience assembling some of the most inviting senior housing, Mr. Tom Caesar with experience in all engineering aspects and especially important given the high water table in this area, Mr. Michael Speck, vice president of Traffic Data Inc. who analyzed the impact in traffic changes in the area, Mr. Paco and Umberto Cabello are theme design innovators and Mr. Peter Villard of Architectural Works. Mr. Villard listed a few of the challenges of the site such as groundwater levels, poor soils, fills, slope grading, zoning issues, neighborhood issues, Anoka County road right-of-way issues, Rice Creek Watershed District and traffic issues. Mr. Villard stated there will be two entrances to the retail portion, one from Central Avenue on the West and from Mississippi Street which would loop the building. One of the amenities is a service area on the east side of the project which services the whole building. A fence would be built on the east side per the wishes of the neighborhood. ' Mr. Villard stated that some of the amenities of the senior housing are the ponding on the west - property line, a gazebo, a promenade entry and a porch that runs into the main entry way of the , building and on the east side there will be a four-seasons porch. There will be meandering - walkways that will hopefully connect to the city trails. There will be retaining walls with 61 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 9 -- landscaping. The existing trees will be removed and a double row of a mixture of evergreen '-_ trees will be added along the east property line to serve as screening for the neighborhood and - as an attractive background for the senior housing residents. _- Mr. Villard stated the existing site is comprised of three drainage areas. There are currently no storm water quality treatment measures on the site. The proposed plan indicates a 35% reduction in the amount of storm water runoff on the site as compared to the present conditions. A large majority of storm water runoff is designed to flow to the south versus ponding along the east side of the property. There will be no negative impacts are anticipated for the adjacent property owners to the east. Mr. Saba asked Mr. Villard why they haven't considered completing the path around the structure as part of the site. Mr. Villard stated that initially they didn't want to have path but did put the path in to accommodate people coming from the southwest and not having to come up the roadside and meandering through the site to go to the retail area. It is not a problem to extend the path along the driveway to hook up with Mississippi Street. Mr. Saba urged Mr. Vallard to complete the path around the both structures. Mr. Kondrick stated that a good percentage of the 71 units might have two cars each and asked how the 73 underground stalls and 30 surFace parking stalls compare to other senior structures. Mr. Villard stated that they try to achieve between 1-'/4 and 1-%z cars per stall in independent living. There are a few one-bedroom and one-bedroom den units and usually people would have one car at that point. The 103 parking stalls averages about 1.45 car stalls per unit. Mr. Kondrick asked about visitor parking. Mr. Villard stated that visitor parking is included and is in front of the main entry way. The plan exceeds the city's district zoning requirements for parking which is 1 to 1. Mr. Villard stated there are nine different types of units from 825 square feet to 1,610 square feet. The unit prices would range from approximately $150,000 for the one bedroom unit to approximately $250,000 for the three bedroom units. Mr. Villard stated the retail building is a single story 13,OQ0 square foot building with between 1- 5 tenants. maximum. The interior space will have 14 to 16 foot high spaces. Mr. Harrison stated he was a suburban planner and his firm has done over 400 developments in 32 states and 5 countries. Mr. Harrison stated that all the units have a quality view. The retail building architect wraps around three sides creating a warm view from outside the senior units. Ms. Savage asked if and how the type of business would be controlled. Mr. Villard stated that the price of the retail dictates the level of retail companies that could '- , afford the space. " 62 __ Planning Commission Meeting, February 18 2004 Page 10 Mr. Saba stated that it had been mentioned that there would be no need for traffic control lights on the corner. For the safety of the individuals crossing the street would that not be a - consideration in terms of providing signal lights. Mr. Spack, TDI Inc., stated that it is a controlled intersection with stop signs. Mr. Spack stated that traffic signals are great for controlling cars but are not friendly to pedestrians. Stop Signs are safer as everyone has to stop at the intersection. The more control there is the less safe it is. Ms. Johns asked that in working with the Rice Creek Watershed was there a need for plantings around the ponds discussed or would there be grass up to the ponds. Mr. Villard stated that plantings have not yet been discussed with the Rice Creek Watershed but that the ponding has been designed in accordance with the Watershed District's requirements. Mr. Virg Okeson of 1423 64th Avenue stated he had concerns regarding pedestrian traffic and if it had been considered in the automobile traffic pattern. Would the age of the senior citizens and the speed at which they will be able to cross the street cause traffic to back up on either Mississippi Street or Central Avenue and affect the egress from 64'" Avenue going west. Another concern was on having enough parking spaces for visitors and residents, has the height of the building been considered. If the buildings were cut down, there would be less cars parked in the facility and open the spaces for visitors. Mr. Okeson stated he is concerned about the ponds and the safety of the children who live in the area or would come to visit a tenant. Mr. Okeson also asked what the plan for the business facifity property would be if it is not pre- leased or built. Mr. Okeson stated he would rather see something that would go with the single family neighborhood and rezone it for single family housing versus zoning it for the proposed rezoning. Ms. Barbara Edwards of 1403 64th Avenue stated she has a problem with the height of the building and that most communities place senior buildings next to parks. She also stated that some of the proposed parking areas have only a 2-foot clearance from the easement. Ms. Edwards stated she had a problem with $200,000 homes on her block being tom down to put up a high rise in a mainly single family single story residential area and that a block and a half there is Moore Lake Plaza. Ms. Edwards stated she is totally against this project and wants it kept residentiaL Mr. Tim Byrne of 6053 Woody Lane stated the comprehensive plan for this area is a product of the city staff which is a recommendation not a law, ordinance or statute. Point finro was that this was spot rezoning as it is essentially turning a business strip and a single family residential into a business strip and R-3 high density residential. The developer does not own any property but has purchase agreements to purchase perfectly good homes in the name of redevelopment. If this project is approved it will set a policy where developers and city staff determine the outcome of what is happening in the city. Mr. Kurt Olson of 1385 64�' Avenue stated he is one lot away from this project and is putting on �- a large addition to his home. Had he known about this project he would not have considered 63 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 11 " __ putting on the addition. He does not want a tall building looking into his back yard and is not for -. this project. He stated the residents should have a say in what the comprehensive plan of - Fridley should be. - � Mr. Mark Mattison of 6421 Central owns one of the lots being redeveloped. The property was purchased in 1992 because he knew the area would eventually be redeveloped. He had spoken to the City several times about constructing townhomes and that the city wanted to redevelop that area because it is a differently plotted area. He cannot split his one-acre lot even though the house sets on a C-1 and the back half of the lot is R-1. The house has no basement and does not fit into the building code where every house should have a basement. This is an excellent time for the city to consider redeveloping this area. Mr. Joe Nelson of 1357 64th Avenue stated his home is one which will not be destroyed but moved. He stated he is about 16 months away from retirement and a couple of months away from being old enough to live in this development. Neither the city nor the developer forced me to sell my home but I openly negotiated with the developer for the sale of the home. Ms. Joan Olson of 6320 Van Buren stated this was spot zoning. It is doubtful that the $500 fee for the rezoning application covers the cost of staff time and it is adding insult to injury to expect the taxpayers to pick up the tab for the balance for staff time not covered by the application fee. Ms. Jean Schwartz of 1372 64'h Avenue stated prior to purchasing their home 18 years ago, they had looked at other areas but when they checked the zoning around the homes, they chose their property because the homes they preferred had apartment buildings close by. They were OK with the zoning as it currently is. She stated that the Commission is sending out the message that no neighborhood is safe from this happening to them. Ms. Andrea Olson of 1385 64th Avenue stated that they were promised this would not happen. People are not in interested in this happening to their neighborhoods. When are you going to listen to the people of Fridley. Ms. Beverly Prior of 1340 Mississippi Street stated that her husband cannot mow the lawn or shovel anymore and a home like this would be perfect for them. This is a wonderful deal to help the elderly people out. Ms. Susan Okeson of 1423 64`h Avenue stated she lives four houses from the proposed project. She agreed the area needed to be spruced up but stated they don't need to exchange residential areas and make them into high density housing and add additional retail space since there is retail space close by that is already struggling. This project is not a good fit for the neighborhood. The neighborhood no longer has trust in their civic government to be comfortable with rezoning the plot and let the City decide what will happen to this area. Mr. Mark Schwartz of 1372 64th Avenue stated when he purchased his property it was zoned R- 1 and had looked at other zoning in the area. He has a passion for hockey and would like to put in a hockey rink on his land, would the rules be changed for that? Probably wouldn't but it is OK to change the rules for this project. That's not right, it is not good for the neighborhood. The core of the city is your neighborhoods and this breaks up that core. Ms. Sue Rau of 1341 64th Avenue stated they have lived in their home for 29 years and their _�- home is one that has been purchased. John has done an excellent job in designing this and would be a great benefit for the area because it is getting run down. There are only two homes , 64 __ Planning Commission Meeting February 18, 2004 Page 12 � on zoned residential; the other two homes are already zoned commercial property. You can't stop developing an area otherwise it would start looking like lower East Minneapolis. - Ms. Inge Eyler of 1456 64th Avenue asked the Commission if they would like a five-story building in your back yard? Mr. Frank DeMello of 6134 Wood Lane stated he owns one of the properties his son is developing. He stated he had concerns of his own because. When his wife suggested their moving to a condo after she saw him sweat mowing the grass or shoveling snow he was against it. He stated that after last summer and what he has seen this year, he feels he is the first - candidate to move into a place like this. No one mentioned the seniors who live in this neighborhood that cannot shovel snow or cut grass and no one comes around to help them. They need a place like this and this building is not an eye sore, it is a tremendous building. Mr. DeMello stated he purchased this property 30 years ago to build a commercial office building but that the zoning was changed back and forth and he never had the chance for 25 years to build only to pay taxes for the rabbits, squirrels and trees that grow on it. He also stated that the city approached him years ago to do something about the machine shop on Mississippi because it is an eye sore, people didn't complain about that but now people complain about this beautiful project. Mr. Harrison stated that in constructing buildings lower than four stories, essentiafly the land is consumed with very little green space. Suburban land costs one-third of what this land would cost. To redevelop this land with single-family homes, you would have to build million dollar homes and no one is going to buy million dollar homes on that corner. He also stated that no upscale store would move into the area until this area was redeveloped or renovated. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded Mr. Oquist, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:58 P.M. Mr. Saba stated that the first issue before them is the rezoning and the plat which needs to be voted on. Mr. Kuechle stated he was in favor of the project and would recommend City Council approval. Mr. Oquist stated he would agree with Mr. Kuechle. We need to continue to try to improve and develop our community to stay ahead of what is happening within the inner city. It is a well thought out project and is in favor of the project. Mr. Saba stated that he was on the commission when the comprehensive plan was being - developed and that they tried to get people to attend those meetings but very few attended. The comments received at the meetings were to protect our parks, schools and we want more senior housing. If people don't like the comprehensive plan, they need to-attend meetings when the plan is being discussed. He urged the developer to construct the path all the way around the building. He is in favor of the plan. -�. Mr. Kondrick stated he agreed with Mr. Saba and is also in favor of this project and that it will be a great addition to the city. [� Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 13 ' __ Ms. Johns stated she also agreed with this project. The petitioner has tried to accommodate �-_ some of the issues that the neighborhood brought forward to them. Fridley needs to continue - redeveloping areas to not remain stagnate. -- Ms. Savage stated she also agreed with this project and tk�at it is good for the community. Mr. Dunham stated he liked the project but did not like the size of it. He stated he is not necessarily for the project because of the height and is also concerned about the parking. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Kuechle to recommend to City Council approval of Rezoning, ZOA #04-01 by Profitmax Inc., to rezone multiple properties from C-1, Local Business, C-2, General Business, and R-1, Single Family to S-2, Redevelopment District, for the purpose of redevelopment, to allow for a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex, generally located at 1340 and 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 and 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 and 1357 64�' Avenue, and two vacant lots, Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition, with the following stipulations: 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A-5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64�' Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run-off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13. A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. .. __ " Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 14 _- 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located - on the site are properly capped or removed. "- 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and - sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. UPON A VOICE VOTE, SIX VOTING AYE, ONE VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED BY A 6 TO 1 VOTE. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to recommend approval of Preliminary Plat PS #04-01, by Profitmax Inc., to replat six parcels into two parcels, for the purpose of constructing a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex, generally located at 1340 and 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 and 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 and 1357 64`h Avenue, and two vacant lots, Lots 17 and 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition, with the following stipulations: 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A-5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64�' Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run-off and management. - 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. - 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13. A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. .- 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building � permit. : 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. 67 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 15 " � 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Special Use Permit SP 04-02, by Kevin & Paulette Holman, to construct a detached garage in their rear yard, which is located in the Flood Fringe District, generally located at 571 79'h Way NE. MOTION made by Mr. Saba, seconded by Ms. Johns, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 10:12 P.M. Ms. Stromberg stated that Kevin and Paulette Holman, are seeking a special use permit to construct a detached garage in their rear yard which is located at 571 79th Way. Their property is located in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District. No structures or buildings can be constructed in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District, without a special use permit. Ms. Stromberg stated the property is located east of the Mississippi River, with the home fronting on 79th Way. The property is zoned, R-1, Single Family as are the properties to the west, north and east. The property to the south of the subject property is a public park. The existing home was constructed in 1962. A garage has never existed on this site. Ms. Stromberg stated City Code states that no buildings or structures can be placed within the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District, unless a special use permit is granted. The proposed structure must be designed and certified by a registered engineer or architect as being in compliance with applicable building codes, including federal standards for flood proofing. The petitioner has submitted all the necessary information needed to meet these requirements, including a certificate of sunrey, and the elevations and structural notes on the proposed structure Ms. Stromberg stated that on this particular property, there can be no living area below 823.8 - feet in elevation. The proposed garage slab will be located at 821 feet in elevation. A garage is allowed to be below the required elevation for living area because it's uninhabitable (not living space) space. The foundation, footing and garage slab have all been engineered to meet FEMA requirements. The garage floor is also designed to drain. The garage slab will be located at 821 feet in elevation, the top of the block elevation will be 823.8 feet, and the wood garage structure will start above the 823.8 feet elevation. ,_. Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed garage meets all setback and lot coverage requirements. _ The petitioners have also submitted a variance request to increase the size of a first accessory �-' .: ' Planning Commission Meeting February 18, 2004 Page 16 _� building from 1,000 square feet to 1,168 square feet and to exceed 100% of the first floor area � of the dwelling unit. That variance request will go before the Appeals Commission next - - Wednesday. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit, with stipulations as structures that are not elevated on fill are a permitted special use in the flood fringe district provided that all Federal and State flood proofing standards are met. Ms. Stromberg stated that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached: 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary siding, color scheme, roof pitch, and roofing materials. 5. The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate as part of a verifying survey prior to the foundation being capped, which shall verify that the minimum garage floor elevation is 821 feet. 6. The petitioner shall flood-proof the garage in accordance with current Federal and State flood-proofing requirements to a minimum of the 100-year flood elevation. 7. Retaining wall needs to be approved by the City's engineering staff prior to construction and will require a separate building permit. 8. Driveway shall meet code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. Ms. Savage asked if any calls were received regarding. Ms. Stromberg stated that two were received and that one neighbor who lives behind the petitioners was concemed about drainage onto their property. Ms. Stromberg stated she contacted Jon Haukaas, the City's Engineer, and she believed he has spoken with the concerned neighbors. Ms. Stromberg stated she also received an inquiry from a neighbor who asked where the garage was going to be located on the site and where the driveway was going to be located. They came in to city hall and reviewed the site plan. Mr. Kondrick asked Mr. Holman if he had any reservations about the stipulations. Mr. Holman stated he did not. Mr. and Mrs. Garland Lagesse of 7951 Broad Avenue stated he lives behind Mr. Holman on the other side of the creek. He had a question about the quantity of fill required to raise the elevation, where is the water going to go. Mr. Kuechle asked is Mr. Lagesse had spoken to Mr. Haukaas. - Mrs. Lagesse stated she had spoken to him and that he didn't think there would be a problem � but that it didn't satisfy her. -- Ms. Savage asked if they were opposed to the garage or only concerned. .• Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 17 �� Mrs. Lagesse stated she only had concerns about how the water would drain and if it would - cause the creek to backup and go towards their property. _- Mr. Holman stated he also had spoken to Mr. Haukaas in the past because he has concerns every time the creek rises. Two years ago the City blocked the creek off so it would back up and with the 30-in. pump in there, Mr. Haukaas stated that it could pretty much keep up with the water in the creek. Mr. Kondrick asked if there was a law that you could not change your property in such a way that it will change the water situation on someone else's property. Mr. Bolin stated that you cannot have a negative impact on neighboring properties. He also stated that with the facts known, there should not be any problems. It is difficult to say with all certainty that there will never be a problem but Mr. Haukaas feels there will not be a problem. MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Mr. Saba, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 10:23 P.M. MOTION by Oquist, seconded by Kuechle, to recommend to City Council approval of Special Use Permit, PS #04-02, by Kevin and Paulette Holman, to construct a detached garage in their rear yard, which is located in the Flood Fringe District, generally located at 571 79th Way NE, with the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary siding, color scheme, roof pitch, and roofing materials. 5. The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate as part of a verifying survey prior to the foundation being capped, which shall verify that the minimum garage floor elevation is 821 feet. 6. The petitioner shall flood-proof the garage in accordance with current Federal and State flood-proofing requirements to a minimum of the 100-year flood elevation. 7. Retaining wall needs to be approved by the City's engineering staff prior to construction and will require a separate building permit. 8. Driveway shall meet code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Savage stated this item will go to City Council on March 8, 2004 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Special Use Permit #SP04-01, by Spring Lake Park School District, to use the property as a classroom for the Life Skills Program, generally located at 7517 4'n _- Street NE. . ' MOTION made by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to open the public hearing. --- 70 ' Planning Commission Meeting February 18 2004 Page 18 - UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE - MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN AT 10:29 P.M. Ms. Stromberg stated that Frank Herman, on behalf of Spring Lake Park School District, is requesting a special use permit to allow a classroom for the Life Skills Program to be operated out of the home, which is located at 7517 4th Street. Ms. Stromberg stated that in order for a program through the school district to be located within a residential home, all applicable building code and accessibility code requirements must be met. Ms. Stromberg stated the subject property is zoned R-1, Single Family as are all surrounding properties. Private schools are a permitted special use in the R-1 Single Family zoning district. While private schools are required to obtain a special use permit and public schools are permitted by right, the school district has committed to go through the special use permit process, so like a private school, it can ensure neighborhood compatibility. Ms. Stromberg stated John and Susan Kvidera are the owners of the property and the Spring Lake Park School District will rent the property from the owners. The Life Skills Program works with students in the 9-12 grades. The program teaches students independent living skills that will enable them to function on their own when they graduate or leave the program. Students in this program have been placed in the special education program meeting criteria such as having a learning disability. The goal of the program is to create a small learning environment that focuses on academic skills, works skills, and living skills. The activities planned for the students included: • Learning outside property maintenance • Planning and providing service learning opportunities within the community • Learning to plan menus which will include shopping and preparing lunches • Providing academic program during school hours Ms. Stromberg stated the prograrn at the subject property will accommodate 5-7 students and will be used during school hours of 7:30 a.m. to 2:15 p.m. Students will follow the District 16 calendar for the day's classes will be in session and there will be no students or staff staying over night. Students will not be allowed to drive to the property, but will be dropped off around 7:45 a.m. and will be picked up around 2:15 p.m. There are no weekend activities or classes planned. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner held a Community Meeting for the neighborhood surrounding the subject property on February 10, 2004. The intent of the meeting is to provide information about the Life Skills Program and answer any questions the neighborhood may have. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner has indicated that parking will be limited to 2 school district staff, the property has adequate parking space for the two vehicles needed to operate the program. Ms. Stromberg stated City staff has heard from two neighboring property owners who have had -_ concerns about the eligibility requirements for the students, their property values, and smoking and loitering on the property and street. Staff will let the petitioner speak to the eligibility = requirements of the students. The school has policies regarding smoking and loitering and staff - has added a stipulation to ensure that the schools policies are being met on this property. Staff 71 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Paqe 19 ' has also spoken with the City Assessor and she has stated that using this property for a Life �-_ Skills Program by the school district won't impact neighboring property values. - Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit request. Ms. Stromberg stated the R-1 Single Family zoning district allows private schools through a special use permit. The "P", Public zoning district includes land area, waterways and water areas which are owned, controlled, regulated, used or proposed to be used by the City of Fridley or other governmental body. The Public zoning district also states that a"P" district is automatically designated at the time of land purchases for the principal uses. It then goes on the state that a"P" district upon removal of public use, automatically reverts back to the original zoning that was on the property prior to the taking for such use. Ms. Stromberg stated a private party will own the subject property and the School District will be renting the property from them. According to the language in the "P" zoning district, if a piece of property is purchased by a public entity, the zoning would automatically become Public. The codes ambiguity makes it unclear if the property is leased, if the land would also automatically become Public. Nonetheless, the School District has agreed to make this request subject to the special use provisions of the R-1, Single Family zoning district to assure neighborhood compatibility, as a private school would be required to do. Ms. Stromberg stated City staff has met with the City Attorney regarding this request and he has agreed that due to the ambiguity of the code, requesting that the School District go through the special use permit process would provide the best outcome for the School District, City and the neighborhood. Ms. Stromberg stated Staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached. 1. Petitioner shall meet all building code and accessibility code requirements prior to the house being used for the Life Skills Program. 2. Parking shall be limited to staff only, no students shall be allowed to drive to the property. 3. School district policies and procedures for loitering, smoking, etc., shall be enforced on the property and adjacent right-of-ways. 4. Use of the property for school activities will be restricted to 7:00 a.m, to 3:00 p.m. 5. Use of the property for school activities will follow the District 16 calendar for the day's classes will be in session. 6. Property shall be properly maintained. 7. A security system with an automatic fire detection system shall be installed in the home to reduce the risk of trespassers or catastrophe. Mr. Oquist stated that stipulation 6 states the property shall be properly maintained. He questioned who would be responsible for mowing and shoveling the snow. Ms. Stromberg stated the property owner would ultimately be responsible for it. Ms. Stromberg stated that the petitioner mentioned that she would like to see the fourth stipulation changed to allow a later evening activity only because it would be beneficial to have the parent meetings for the students at the house. She was requesting a change to 7:00 a.m. to -- _ 9:00 p.m. City staff doesn't have an issue with this change. " Ms. Savage asked if the petitioner had indicated how often these meetings would occur. -- 72 ` Planning Commission Meeting February 18 2004 Page 20 - Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner had indicated monthly at the most. - Ms. Flo Jackson, a teacher for the Life Skills Transition Program, stated she was representing Mr. Frank Herman who was attending a school conference. Mr. John Zurek, on staff at Spring Lake Park High School Learning Alternate Program, and works with Ms. Jackson. Ms. Savage asked if they would regularly need to have activities restricted beyond 3:00 p.m. Ms. Jackson stated it would be once a month at the most and 7:00 p.m. would most likely be the latest that meetings would be held. She stated 7:00 p.m. would be sufficient. Ms. Johns asked if all parents were at the meeting once a month or just one at a time and if parking would be an issue. Ms. Jackson stated it would be one parent and possibly a county person so parking would not be an issue. Mr. Saba asked what would be done at this residential property that could not be done in a school building. Ms. Jackson stated that the special use permit request indicates grades 9-12 but they actually work with students from the age of 17 to 21. The special education law passed in 1997 called the IDEA, mandates transition activities to be provided for special education students. We work with these students on living skills, independent skills, trying to assist with their independence at age 21 when they will move on to the next level of their development. A kitchen is needed to assist students with leaming skills in the site in which they will be using them. Teaching them kitchen safety is difficult in a class room. Mr. Oquist asked if it could be set up in the classroom environment in the school where there is a kitchen rather than disturbing a neighborhood and creating a situation where people do not know their neighbors and who does or does not belong there. Ms. Jackson stated they do not come in to disrupt a neighborhood but that these are Fridley young peopte who are part of the school district. The intent is to help these students to learn how be a part of a neighborhood and the only way to do that is to make them part of a neighborhood. - Ms. Savage stated that stipulation 3 states that school district policies and procedures for loitering, smoking, etc., shall be enforced on the property. Ms. Jackson stated school policy does not allowed students to smoke at any time even if they are going to or are on a job site. This rule applies to all school activities. Mr. Kuechle stated that to resolve the issue of time in stipu�ation 4, would 8:00 p.m. and 10 times a year. � Ms. Jackson stated that 8:00 p.m. would be more than sufficient. 73 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 21 " _ Mr. Gregory Zelenak of 7526 4th Street, stated he had gone around the neighborhood and �-. collected a petition of approximately 30 signatures of residents and property owners who are - against this special use permit. He understood the property is for sale and is being purchased -� by the spouse of a teacher in the Alternative Learning Program and would be renting it the - school district for $900 to $1,500 a month. This is a conflict of interest. Mr. Zelenak stated it was also unclear about the possibility of expansion of the program, there are no set time limits as to how long the program exists with the funding it may have and would like a stipulation as to how long the program would last if the permit is approved. Mr. Zelenak stated that the Life Skills Program is under an umbrella of learning alternatives and if the other programs would use these facilities. He is also concerned about the enforcement of the stipulations. He would also like inspections by either the city of school district either every 6 months or yearly to ensure they are following the stipulations. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Kondrick , to receive the petition. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED. Ms. Karen Evans, of 7558 4t'' Street, stated that they already have transitional homes in the neighborhood. There were two and one was burned by one of the children and also there is an alcohol treatment center and a half-way house for women. Purchase all of our properties or leave us alone. We would like to see something positive rather than negative in the neighborhood. Mr. Ken Christianson, of 7525 4th Street, stated he has lived in the house just north of this property for 40 years. The educators state all special education students should be main streamed but that the school does not have enough room. It is not up to a neighborhood to take care of the problem that should be in District 16. The property is located in District 16 and the decision should be made by District 16 and not residents who live in District 14. Mr. Christianson stated the city assessor said this would not devalue his property. He feels the school will lower the value of his property by $10,000 to $20,000 and would like a guarantee from the City that if he sells his property it will not go down in value. Mr. Christianson asked if Mr. & Mrs. Kvidera had already purchased the property or if it was contingent on the special use permit being granted. If there is a price attached to the lease it would give them a guaranteed investment not available to others purchasing a house. My wife and I are not in favor of this special use permit. Mr. Roland Evans of 7558 4th Street, stated he has the same concerns. He feels their homes will be devalued. He feels that potential buyers would not be interested in his property if this school was located four houses away from his. Another concern is this house will not have to be renovated to accommodated handicapped children. He also had concern regarding how the school will be able to control the students as they are no longer kids. Juanita stated she has lived on 5th Street for 32 years. She does not like the changes that are happening in the area. There are a lot of unsubstantiated responses. She stated she has __. concern and there other options available. She is not in favor of this permit. 74 w " Planning Commission Meeting February 18 2004 Page 22 _- Mr. John Kvidera, stated he is to purchase this property on March 16, 2004. He stated that � these kids will not onty be working in the kitchen but also doing laundry, house cleaning, etc. '- and feels the property will be cleaner than neighboring property. Ms. Savage asked Mr. Kvidera if he would be responsible for maintaining the property. Mr. Kvidera stated that it is his property and he would be responsible for all maintenance. As part of the lease agreement, the school would be responsible for some of the maintenance work. Ms. Shanti Van Buren of 7550 4th Street, stated that it was mentioned that a home setting is needed for the skills to be learned but that these things can be found in the school. There is a lot of gray areas open to interpretation and has a concern about property values. Ms. Savage asked the petition about the type of disabilities these students have. Ms. Jackson stated that this is for all students with disabilities but the majority of students that are in the program have developmental disability. These students have tower IQ's and need extra time to develop those skills and the best setting is that in which they will be using those skills. Ms. Jackson stated that because of confidentiality issues, conferences would be held with only one student at a time. Mr. Saba asked if the school had considered purchasing a home and having it moved to school property. He stated that Fridley students build a home, sell it and move it and discuss with the people who build the home and see if custom requirements built in and move the home close to Spring Lake Park school. Ms. Jackson stated that they have building and trades within the District program and that possibly some time in the near future they would be able to do that. Mr. Kondrick asked is they had considered the Fridley Community Center where they have class room settings. Ms. Jackson stated they are trying to get away from the classroom setting as these kids have already been through high school and that they are in the Spring Lake School District so they would not use the Fridley Community Center. Their community center is full and does not have enough space for the programs they already have. She stated there would be a transportation issue if they moved out of their school district. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 11:35 P.M. Mr. Kondrick asked if the permit could be pulled if there are problems in the future. _' Ms. Stromberg stated the special use permit can be reviewed and could be revoked if they are � not meeting their stipulations. 75 Planning Commission Meeting, February 18, 2004 Page 23 � Mr. Kuechle stated that if a stipulation were to state that there could be no more than 10 kids, if �-_ that would be workable. � Ms. Jackson stated it would be agreeable. Mr. Oquist stated that he wouldn't mind if this was done for a year, two or three while they develop something on the school site, but am opposed to this as it goes against everything we have learned about neighborhood crime watch and cannot support the special use permit. Mr. Saba stated he also was not in favor of it as no one in the neighborhood seems to like it. Mr. Dunham stated he was also opposed to the permit. Ms. Savage stated she was in favor of the permit with the stipulations, there is a need to have a review after a year. Mr. Kondrick stated he would vote for it also for the same reason. I would add stipulations for the number of kids, the length of time on this special use permit and not be flexible on the hours. Mr. Kuechle stated it is a mandated program and we should do it. He is concerned that there are two other similar situations in that neighborhood and need to keep an eye on it. Ms. Johns stated there is a need for it but not necessarily in a neighborhood. She stated she would be opposed to it only because it would be nice to rotate it into different neighborhoods and not in one neighborhood for a long period of time. MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Kuechle to recommend to City Council approval of Special Use Permit #04-01, by Spring Lake Park School District, to use the property as a classroom for the Life Skills Program, generally located at 7517 4�' Street NE, with the 7 stipulations as presented by staff, with a modification to stipulation #4, stating that the hours for student activity would be 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. except one day a month until 8:00 p.m., and an addition of stipulation #8, which requires this special use permit to be reviewed in one year and an addition of stipulation #9 to limit the program to a maximum of 10 children. Mr. Kuechle stated you cannot put a stipulation that it is good for only one year. Mr. Kondrick amended his motion to review the permit in a year's time, seconded by Mr. Kuechle. Ms. Jackson asked if she was permitted to be at the facility after 3:00. Mr. Kuechle amended the stipulation of student activity from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. once a month. UPON A VOICE VOTE, THREE VOTING AYE, FOUR VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DELCARED THE MOTION FAILED ON A 3 TO 4 VOTE. MOTION by Mr. Saba, seconded by Mr. Dunham to recommend denial of Special Use Permit #04-01, by Spring Lake Park School District to use the property as a classroom for the Life '- . Skills Program, generally located at 7517 4`h Street NE. � 76 _ - Planning Commission Meeting February 18 2004 Page 24 -� UPON A VOICE VOTE, FOUR VOTING AYE, THREE VOTING NAY, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED ON A 4 TO 3 VOTE. Ms. Savage stated this will go to the City Council on March 8, 2004. 5. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 5 2004 PARKS 8� RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING MOTION made by Mr. Kondrick , seconded by Kuecle, to receive the January 5, 2004, Parks and Recreation Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 20 2004 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 8� ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING: MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Kondrick, to approve the January 20, 2004 Environmental Quality and Energy Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTtON CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 4 2003. HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING: MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to approve the December 4, 2003 Housing and Redevelopment Authority Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Mr. Kuechle recognized the award received by Dave Kondrick from the Parks and Recreation Commission. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr. Kondrick, seconded by Mr. Saba, to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON SAVAGE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE FEBRUARY 18, 2004, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:38 P.M. Stacy Stro berg ' City Planr�e 77 CITY OF FRIDLEY APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 25, 2004 CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson Kuechle called the February 25, 2004, Zoning Commission meeting to order at 7:29 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ken Vos, Sue Jackson, Larry Kuechle, Blaine Jones, Gary Zinter Others Present: Stacy Stromberg, Planner Kevin & Paulette Holman, 571 79`h Way NE David & Jennifer Jensen, 5297 Lincoln Street NE Roberta Chibel APPROVE APPEALS COMMISSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 10, 2003 MOTION made by Mr. Zinter seconded by Mr. Jones, to approve the December 10, 2003, minutes as written. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Variance Request VAR #04-01, by Kevin and Paulette Holman. Per Section 205.07.01.B.(4)(a)) of the Fridley Zoning Code, to increase the maximum size of a first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet, and to allow an accessory structure to exceed 100% of the first floor area of a dwelling unit, to allow the construction of a 1,168 square foot detached garage, in the rea� yard, legally described as Lots 7, 8, 9, Block N, Riverview Heights, subject to easement of Record, generally located at 571 79�' Way NE. MOTION by Ms. Jackson, seconded by Mr. Vos, to waive the full public reading and open the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:31 P.M.. Ms. Stromberg stated Kevin and Paulette Holman, are requesting two variances in order to allow the construction of a 1,168 square feet detached garage in the rear yard of their residence, which is located at 571 79th Way. Ms. Stromberg stated they are seeking a variance to increase the maximum size of a first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,168 square feet. Ms. Stromberg stated they are also seeking a variance to exceed 100% of the first floor area of their dwelling unit, from 1,118 square feet to 1,168 square feet. _- Ms. Stromberg stated the property is located on 79th Way, east of the Mississippi River, with the home fronting on 79th Way. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family as are the properties to =. � Zoning Commission Meeting, February 25 2004 Page 2 the west, north and east. The property to the south of the subject property is a public park. The existing home was constructed in 1962. A garage has never existed on this site. Ms. Stromberg stated the summary of hardship submitted by the petitioners reads: "We are requesting the additional 160 square feet because since we have lived in our house we have seen two 100 year floods, both resulting in extensive water damage in our basement. Therefore, we have great apprehension in storing items like keepsakes and Christmas decorations in our basement. We are in need of a larger garage due to a lack of storage space in our home." Ms. Stromberg stated the subject property is located in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District. City Code states that no buildings or structures can be placed within the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District, unless a special use permit is granted. The proposed structure must be designed and certified by a registered engineer or architect as being in compliance with applicable building codes, including federal standards for flood-proofing. The petitioner has submitted all the necessary information needed to meet these requirements, including a certificate of survey, and the elevations and structural notes on the proposed structure. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner has applied for a special use permit that was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission on February 18, 2004. Their request will go before the City Council on March 8, 2004. Ms. Stromberg stated City Code requires that the first accessory building shall not exceed 100% of the first floor area of a dwelling unit or a maximum of 1,000 square feet. As stated above, the petitioners are seeking to exceed the 1,000 square foot maximum of a first accessory building by 168 square feet. The petitioner's existing home is 1,118 square feet, so not only are the petitioners requesting to exceed the maximum requirement allowed of 1,000 square feet for a first accessory building, but they are also exceeding the first floor area of their dwelling. Ms. Stromberg stated that before the Commission shall grant a variance, it is the responsibility of the applicant to prove that enforcement of the code would case undue hardship because of conditions unique to the property and that if the variance is granted it will be keeping with the intent of the ordinance. Undue hardship as defined by law is: 1. The property cannot be put to reasonable use if used under the requirements of the code. 2. The need for the variance is due to the conditions unique to the property and not created by actions of the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Ms. Stromberg stated that City Staff has not been able to identify any hardship, as defined by the law, that would allow staff to recommend anything but denial of the request to allow the 1s1 accessory structure to exceed the first floor area of the existing house. The petitioner has not listed out any legally defined hardship in their letter of hardship that would allow the accessory structure to be larger than their home. In reviewing the petitioner's request, staff applied the legal definition of hardship and developed the following analysis: 1. The property cannot be put to reasonable use if used under the requirements of the - code. • • Property can accommodate an accessory structure of at least 1,000 square -_ feet, which allows adequate room for vehicle parking and storage. "-- 2. The need for the variance is due to unique property conditions. 79 Zoning Commission Meeting February 25, 2004 Page 3 __ � • The property being located in the flood plain is a unique condition to the --- property, however, the petitioners desire to construct a garage larger than the size of the existing home is not a unique condition. -_ • A garage of 1,118 square feet (the existing size of the home) would still provide adequate room for storage space. 3. The variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. . The code requires that an accessory structure doesn't exceed the size of the home to maintain the residential quality of a neighborhood. Garages that oversize the home dominate the site and the neighborhood. This neighborhood consists mainly of smaller homes, with two car garages. The size of the proposed garage would be out of place in this neighborhood. - Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff has no recommendation on the variance to exceed the size of the first accessory structure over 1,000 square feet as a similar variance has been granted in the past.. Ms. Stromberg stated a similar variance was granted in 1994 at 501 Rice Creek Boulevard. This variance was approved to increase the size of the first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,144 square feet. Ms. Stromberg stated that City Staff recommends denial of the variance to exceed the first floor area of the dwelling.because no similar variances have been granted in the past and there is no undue hardship. Ms. Stromberg stated that Staff recommends that if the variance is granted, the following stipulations be attached. 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary side, color scheme, roof pitch and roofing materials. 5. All vehicles shall be stored on a hard surface driveway as approved by the City. 6. Driveway shall meet the code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. Mr. Holman stated that the garage would be at the same grade as the first level of the house. Mr. Holman stated that the water comes up through the basement floor, not through the walls or windows. Mr. Holman stated the reason for requesting the oversize garage is because the basement cannot be used and the house has no upstairs. The larger garage virould be used to store items which would normally be stored in the basement in addition to the items which are currently stored in the shed. Mr. Holman stated that about 10 years ago there was about an inch of water in the basement. _- When the City reconstruction the area, the water level was really deep and the basement had to be totally gutted because mold had developed between the walls. _-: :� Zoning Commission Meeting, February 25, 2004 Page 3 __ � • The property being located in the flood plain is a unique condition to the property, however, the petitioners desire to construct a garage larger than the size of the existing home is not a unique condition. • A garage of 1,118 square feet (the existing size of the home) would still provide adequate room for storage space. 3. The variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. • The code requires that an accessory structure doesn't exceed the size of the home to maintain the residential quality of a neighborhood. Garages that oversize the home dominate the site and the neighborhood. This neighborhood consists mainly of smaller homes, with two car garages. The size of the proposed garage would be out of place in this neighborhood. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff has no recommendation on the variance to exceed the size of the first accessory structure over 1,000 square feet as a similar variance has been granted in the past.. Ms. Stromberg stated a similar variance was granted in 1994 at 501 Rice Creek Boulevard. This variance was approved to increase the size of the first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,144 square feet. Ms. Stromberg stated that City Staff recommends denial of the variance to exceed the first floor area of the dwelling.because no similar variances have been granted in the past and there is no undue hardship. Ms. Stromberg stated that Staff recommends that if the variance is granted, the following stipulations be attached. 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary side, color scheme, roof pitch and roofing materials. 5. All vehicles shall be stored on a hard surface driveway as approved by the City. 6. Driveway shall meet the code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. Mr. Holman stated that the garage would be at the same grade as the first level of the house. Mr. Holman stated that the water comes up through the basement floor, not through the walls or windows. Mr. Holman stated the reason for requesting the oversize garage is because the basement cannot be used and the house has no upstairs. The larger garage would be used to store items which would normally be stored in the basement in addition to the items which are currently stored in the shed. Mr. Holman stated that about 10 years ago there was about an inch of water in the basement. _-- When the City reconstruction the area, the water level was really deep and the basement had to be totally gutted because mold had developed between the walls. = :� Zoning Commission Meeting, February 25, 2004 Page 5 �_ _ 3. Totai square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. -- 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary side, color scheme, roof pitch and roofing materials. - 5. All vehicles shall be stored on a hard surface driveway as approved by the City. - 6. Driveway shall meet the code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Mr. Jones, seconded by Mr. Zinter to recommend denial of the variance request for the accessory building to exceed the square foot of the current house. If the variance is approved, the Commission recommends the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary side, color scheme, roof pitch and roofing materials. 5. All vehicles shall be stored on a hard surface driveway as approved by the City. 6. Driveway shall meet the code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Ms. Jackson to receive the letter relative to variance request #04-01 from the resident at 501 79t'' Way. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE REQUEST VAR #04-02 BY DAVID AND JENNIFER JENSEN Per Section 205.07.03.D.(2).(C)((3)) of the Fridley Zoning Code to reduce the required side yard setback for an accessory structure which opens on a side street from 25 feet to 17'h feet to allow the construction of a 22' x 22' detached garage, legally described as Lot 14, 13, Block 1, Horizon Heights, generally located at 5297 Lincoln Street NE. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Jackson to waive the full public reading and open the public hearing at 8:13 p.m. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Strombecg stated the petitioners, David and Jennifer Jensen, are seeking a variance to reduce the side yard setback for an accessory structure that opens to a side street from 25 feet to 17'/2 feet to allow for the construction of a 22 ft. by 22 ft. detached garage at their residence, _ which is located at 5297 Lincoln Street. _-' Ms. Stromberg stated that the summary of hardship submitted by the petitioner reads: "We are requesting that a variance be granted to reduce the side yard setback on a corner lot for an : accessory structure from 25 feet to 17'/z feet. The proposed variance would eliminate three -- 82 _� Zoning Commission Meeting, February 25, 2004 Page 4 Ms. Jackson asked about placing shelves in the basement for storage. - Mr. Holman stated that the fire department has warned them that if the basement gets flooded too bad, the basement would have to be filled in to prevent the walls from collapsing in. The last time that happened they had 6 hours to get everything out of the house. Mr. Kuechle stated that the problem with this issue is not the 1,118 but of the garage larger than the size of the house. He would like it cut back approximately 50 square feet to get into the 1,118 square feet. Mr. Holman stated he could make it 24 x 20 square foot structure which would give 1,120 square feet but would be difficult to get it to the 1,118 foot. Another shed would be constructed if the garage was 1,118 square feet. Ms. Roberta Chibel stated she was the daughter of Earl Gemmill who owns Lot 6, and asked where the location of the garage access would be. She also stated that the existing tar and yard is not to be used for accessing the garage. Mr. Holman stated access to the garage would face east and woufd not access it by the yard. Ms.Chibel stated there was some concern about drainage unto her father's yard. Mr. Holman stated that the question was addressed to Jon Haukaas who stated there didn't appear to be a problem with the drainage. MOTION by Mr. Zinter, seconded by Mr. Jones to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:00 P.M. Dr. Vos stated that he does not see a hardship and would vote no on both variance requests. Ms. Jackson stated she did not have a problem with exceeding 1,000 square feet up to the foot- print but would not go for larger than the footprint because it would set a precedent. Mr. Kuechle stated that variances for first and second accessory structures that exceeded 1,000 square feet have been approved but does have a problem with going beyond the 1,118 square feet of the house because it hasn't been done before and it would be setting a precedent. He recommended approval of the first and denial of the second variance request. Mr. Jones stated he did not see a hardship to go above the 1,000 square feet but does have a problem with 1,168 square feet because it sets a precedent. Mr. Zinter stated he agreed with flexibility on the placement and size of the structure but did not support exceeding the 1,118 square feet. MOTION by Dr. Vos, seconded by Mr. Jones to approve the variance request for the maximum size of the first accessory structure of 1,000 square feet but not to exceed the current footprint �_ of the home, with the following stipulations: -. 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. --- 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 81 � " Zoning Commission Meeting, February 25, 2004 Page 6 _- distinct problems. We could preserve more rear yard space, mature trees and shrubs due to the front yard setback being dictated by prior construction. It would eliminate potential drainage �- problems to my neighbor to the south, due to my lot slope and my neighbor's lower elevation. - We could also maintain what I think to be a more appealing site line with our existing attached garage. Ms. Stromberg stated the property is zoned R-1, Single Family as are the properties to the north, west and south. The property to the east is zoned P, Public Facilities and is the location of a city water tower. The property is on southeast corner of Lincoln Street and 53`d Avenue, with the home and attached garage facing Lincoln Street. The original home was constructed in 1957. In 2000, that home was demolished and in 2001, the existing home and garage were constructed. Ms. Stromberg stated that City Code requires a side yard setback of finrenty-five (25) feet for an attached or unattached accessory building, which opens on the side street. The existing attached garage, which faces Lincoln Street is set back at 17.5 feet from the property line. The petitioner is requesting to keep that sight line consistent by constructing a 22 ft. by 22 ft. detached garage off of 53`� Avenue to also be set back at 17'/2 feet. To preserve mature trees and avoid a drainage issue with the petitioner neighbors to the south, the petitioner is requesting this variance request. Ms. Stromberg stated that City staff has received one letter of support from a neighboring property owner. Ms. Stromberg stated that City Staff has no recommendation as this variance is within previously granted dimensions. Ms. Stromberg stated that a similar variance was granted in 2002 at 7857 Alden Way to reduce the required side yard setback for an accessory structure which opens on a side street from 25 feet to 13 feet. Ms. Stromberg stated that Staff recommends that if the variance is granted, the following stipulations be attached. 1. Petitioner shall obtain necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Petitioner shall install Code required Hard surFace driveway within 12 months of issuance of a building permit. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The garage shall be architecturally compatible with the existing home and finished with complementary siding and color scheme. 5. All vehicles shall be stored on a hard surface driveway as approved by the City. 6. The garage shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. Mr. Jensen stated that there is an existing curb cut off of 53`� so there would not be a need for a new curb cut. Mr. Kuechle asked the petitioner if there was a problem with any of the stipulations. � Mr. Jensen stated he had no problem with the stipulations. Mr. Zinter asked if the rise towards the water tower started in the alley section. � .� �� --- -- II Zoning Commission Meeting February 25, 2004 Page 7 � , Mr. Jensen stated it starts on his property and gradually continues to the City property. MOTION by Mr. Zinter, seconded by Mr. Jones, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:22 P.M. MOTION by Ms. Jackson, seconded by Mr. Jones to approve variance request #04-02 to rduce the required side yard setback for an accessory structure which opens on a side street from 25 feet to 17'/� feet to allow the construction of a 22 ft. by 22 ft. detached garage, generally located at 5297 Lincoln Street, with the following stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall obtain necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Petitioner shall install Code required hard surFace driveway within 12 months of issuance of a building permit. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The garage shall be architecturally compatible with the existing home and finished with complementary siding and color scheme. 5. All vehicles shall be stored on a hard surface driveway as approved by the City. 6. The garage shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED TO MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Kuechel stated that with unanimous approval of the commission and with no recommendation of City staff, this did not have to go to City Council. 3. UPDATE ON PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY ACOUNCIL ACTIONS Ms. Stromberg stated that at the Planning Commission last week there was a request to build 71 senior condominiums and a commercial complex on the southeast corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The Planning Commission recommended approval on a 6 to 1 vote. That request will go before City Council on March 8, 2004. 4. OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Mr. Jones, seconded by Mr. Zinter, to adjourn the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KUECHLE DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE FEBRUARY 25, 2004 APEALS COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:25 P.M. Stacy Strd�jberg City Plann�� :- -- r - � CITY OF FRIDLEY _ To: From: Date: Re: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF March 8, 2004 William W. Burns, City Manager �,,� � � Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk March 4, 2004 Resolution Scheduling a Public Hearing to Amend the Fridley City Charter by Ordinance as Recommended by the Charter Commission The Fridley Charter Commission has proposed an amendment to the City Charter by recommending the amendment to the City Council in ordinance format, as shown in Atta.chment 1. The ordinance proposes to amend the City Charter by removing water, storm water, sanitary sewer and recycling fees from Section 7.02.03.A., the section which defines fees and replacing them in Section 7.02.03.B., the section defining what fees does not include. Some of the reasons for the proposed change as presented to the public on February 10, 2004, in a public forum, which was also televised several times, are: The City currently does not fully recover its costs for providing these services. These charges are really "pass-through" charges. The practice of the City is to only recover its costs in providing water, sewer and recycling services, and does not make a profit.. • The restrictions on increases in these charges is an unintended outcome of the charter amendment that was passed by the voters in November of 2000. That change was intended to restrict actions by the City Council to substantially increase services and costs paid by taxpayers beyond the rate of inflation, and not to impose other taxes upon residents by adding sales taxes or "franchise fees" on top of utility charges. It was not intended to cover pass-through type charges such as water, sewer and recycling fees. In order to increase costs beyond the rate of inflation (currently at 1.8%) the City Council must submit a proposal to be voted on in the next general election. This is a very cumbersome process which typically requires a long lead time. Also, the standard for obtaining voter approval is quite high, requiring a 51 % approval by all persons voting in the election (not just those voting on the issue). 85 • Water and sewer costs are increasing due to a number of outside factors beyond the �. -_ control of the city. These include: federal mandates that impose increasingly higher standards for water and sewer, higher sewer disposal charges imposed upon the city by -" the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services agency that is responsible for overall - sewage disposal in the Twin Cities area, and ongoing emergency repairs and maintenance of the system's infrastructure. • Recycling fees are merely a"pass-through" of contracts for services that are re-bid every two years; and are subject to market conditions. These costs typically vary due to changes in prices the collectors receive for bottles, cans, paper, etc, that are collected Staff has put together the following timeline for the City Council to use as a reference for this amendment: - Date Action March 1 Charter Commission Recommends Sending Amendment to City Council March 11 Clerk sends Notice of Public Hearing and amendment to Sun Focus (and web site) for ublication March 18 and 25 Hearing Notice with proposed Amendment published in Sun Focus (two week ublished notice re uired March 29 Public Hearin on Ordinance for Pro osed Amendment April 12 First Reading of Ordinance on Proposed Amendment (unanimous vote Apri126 Second Reading of Ordinance on Proposed Amendment (unanimous vote required) Ordinance becomes effective 90 days after adoption and ublication if ublished 5/6 it becomes effective 8/5) A ri129 Clerk sends ordinance to Focus (and web site for ublication May 6 Publication in focus of ordinance ado ted July 6 Under MN Stat 410.12, Subd. 7, Deadline for referendum petition to be submitted and certified to send to November Election (2% signatures of registered voters of the total votes cast in 2002 General Election. 12,512.x .02 = 251 si atures re uired July 16 City clerk must certify whether petition is sufficient or insufficient and notify circulators of etition July 26 If petition was insufficient, Petition Committee has 10 additional days to recirculate etition to obtain additional si atures July 31 City clerk must certify whether petition is sufficient or insufficient and notify circulators of petition. If sufficient, prepare a resolution to place _ question on ballot, if insufficient, petition remains insufficient and there is no additional time to circulate an other etition. _ Au ust 10 Last da for Charter Commission to submit ro osed charter amendment Se 13 Last day to ado t a resolution declarin a munici al election for November Sep 14 Last day to submit written notice to Anoka County of November municipal election if City Council decides to send an increase to the voters Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution scheduling a public hearing to amend the __ Fridley City Charter for Monday, March 29, 2004 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, as --' shown in Attachment 2. :. - - Atta.chment 1 " ORDINANCE NO. - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7.02, POWER OF TAXATION, OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER The Fridley City Council hereby finds after review, examination and recommendation of the Charter Commission that Section 7.02, Power of Taxation, of the Fridley City Charter be hereby amended and ordain as follows: Fridley City Charter Chapter 7. Taxation and Finances Section 7.02 POWER OF TAXATION 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 the purposes of this subsection, "fees" includes sales and use taxes, utility charges other than sewer and water), ��;•=!_�b �-�, gas and electric franchise fees and any other fee that produces a ta�L burden or direct financial obligation for all property owners and/or residents of Fridley. (Ref Ord 1152) B. For the purposes of this subsection, the term "fees" does not include: Water. storm water and sanitarv sewer char�es; recvclin� fees; Parks and Recreation Department participarion fees, chazges 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 housing fees, building permit fees, liquor license fees, the extension or transfer of cable television service authority to additional service providers for which fees are already being charged, fees for the operation of junk yards, annual license fees for the operation of pawn shops and other regulated business, and any other charge for services, including health and safety related Code enforcement, and other goods, services or materials routinely provided by the City to its citizens or other members of the public which, by law, must be limited to the actual cost of the service being provided. The term "fees" shall not include any special assessments made under Minnesota Statutes Section 429. (Ref Ord 1152) PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2004. ATTEST: Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk Public Heazing: First Reading: - - Second Reading: 87 Scott J. Lund, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 2004-_ Attachment 2 ' - A RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND -- THE FRIDLEY CITY CHARTER - Whereas, the Fridley City Charter Commission has recommended amending the Fridley City Charter by ordinance format; and Whereas, Minnesota Statutes Section 410.12, Subd. 7, allows an amendment by ordinance; and Whereas, Minnesota Statutes Section 410.12, Subd. 7, requires that a public hearing be held with two _ weeks published notice when amending the city charter by ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Fridley declares that a - public hearing will be held on Monday, March 29, 2004, at 730 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Fridley Municipal Center located at 6431 University Avenue NE; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Fridley City Clerk is hereby directed to publish the amendment in the official city newspaper with two weeks published notice prior to the public hearing. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS _ DAY OF 2004. ATTEST: Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk :: Scott J. Lund, Mayor -- r _ a. QTY OF FRIDLEY _ To: From: Date: Re: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF March 8, 2004 William W. Burns, City Manager�� Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Deb Skogen, City Clerk February 25, 2004 Italian American Club Foundation Premise Permit Renewal Main Event Restaurant, 7820 University Avenue NE Section 30 of the Fridley City Code allows Lawful Gambling by a licensed organization. The Italian American Club Foundation is cuirently conducting charitable gambling at the Main Event located at ?820 University Avenue I�TE. Their Charitable Gaznbling Premise Permit expires on June 30, 2004. The renewal application requires a resolution from the City Council approving the renewal. If approved, the premise permit would become effective July 1, 2004 and expire June 30, 2006. Please find a resolution for the renewal premise permit. Staff recommends approval of the premise permit renewal by adoption of the attached resolution. � RESOLUTION NO. 2004 - RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A NiINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION FOR THE ITALIAN AMERICAN CLUB FOUNDATION LOCATED AT MA1N EVENT, 7820 UNIVERSIT'Y AVENUE NE VV��REAS, the City of Fridley has been served with a copy of an Application for a Minnesota. Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the Italian American Club Foundation; and WHEREAS, the location of the Premise Permit is for the Main Evern Restaurant, 7820 University Avenue NE, and will be effective from July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2006; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has found no reason to restrict the location for the charitable gambling operation. NOW, TI-�REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley approves the Minnesota Lawful Ga.mbling Premise Permit Applicaxion for the Italian American Club Foundation, located at the Main Event Restaurant, 7820 University Avenue NE. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY TI� CITY COUNCIL OF TI� CTTY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2004. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK .� SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR � o -- r _ i► OTY OF F&IDLEY . To: From: Date: Re: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 William W. Burns, City Manager �� 17 Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Deb Skogen, City Clerk February 25, 2004 Knights of Columbus Hall, 6831 Highway 65 NE Premises Permit Renewal Section 30 of the Fridley City Code allows Lawful Gambling by a licensed organization. The Knights of Columbus is currently conducting charitable gambling at their facility located at 6831 Highway 65 NE. Their Charitable Gambling Premise Permit expires on May 31, 2004. The renewal application requires a resolution from the City Council approving the renewal. If approved, the premise permit would become effective June 1, 2004 and expire May 31, 2006. Please find a resolution for the renewal premise permit. Staff recommends approval of the premise permit renewal by adoption of the attached resolution. 91 RESOLUTION NO. 2004 � - . RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERMIT FOR HIvIGHTS OF COLUMBUS, 6831 HIGHWAY 65 NE VJHEREAS, the City of Fridley has been served with a copy of an Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the Knights of Columbus Counci14381; and , WHEREAS, the location of the Premise Permit is at their premises, 6831 Highway 65 NE, and will be effective from June 1, 2004 to May 31, 2006; and � WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has found no reason to restrict the location for the charita.ble gambling operation. NOW, TI�REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley approves the Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit Application for the Knights of Columbus at their facility located at 6831 Highway 65 NE. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF TI� CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS _ DAY OF 2004. ATTEST: DEBR.A A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK '� SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR � I _ � CfTY OF FRIDLEY _ To: From: Date: Re: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF March 8, 2004 William W. Burns, City Manager,fc��° q� - Richard D. Pribyl, Finance Director Deb Skogen, City Clerk March 1, 2004 Fridley VFW Post 363 - Charitable Gambling Premise Permit Renewal Section 30 of the Fridley City Code allows Lawful Gambling by a licensed organization. The Fridley VFW is currently conducting charitable gambling on their premises located at 1040 Osborne Road. Their Charitable Gambling Premise Pemut expired on February 29, 2004. The renewal application requires a resolution from the City Council approving the renewal. The VFW submitted their application in November without the affirming resolution. Their pernut expired Sunday, February 29�'. If approved, the premise permit would become effective immediately and expire February 28, 2006. Please find a resolution for the renewal premise permit. Staff recommends approval of the premise permit renewal by adoption of the attached resolution. 93 RESOLUTION NO. 2004 . " - RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR A MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISE PERNIIT FOR FRIDLEY VFW, POST 363 WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has been served with a copy of an Application for a Minnesota. Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for the Fridley VFW, Post 363, and WHEREAS, the location of the Premise Pernut is for their premises located at 1040 Osborne Road and will be effective immediately and expire to February 28, 2006; and WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has found no reason to restrict the location for the charita.ble gambling operation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Fridley approves the Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit Application for the Fridley VFW Post 363 on their premises located at 1040 Osborne Road. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS DAY OF 2004. ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK 94 SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR _ � ,-� � � - CIIY OF - FILIDLEY TO: FROM: DATE: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 Wiliiarn W. Burns, City Manager �cp� Jon ., aukaas, Pubiic Works Director March 3, 2004 PW04-021 SUBJECT: Resolution Supporting Improved Funding Options for City Street Improvements The City of Fridley has been in the forefront of the group of cities advocating the creation of enabling legislation aliowing cities to create a°str-eet utility° for many years. The League of Minnesota Cities has been working with the Minnesota Public Works Association and the City Engineers Association in putting together the background data to explain the justification and exarnples of how it would work The attached list shows the 130 cities in Minnesota who have passed resolutions supporting this type of legislation. Bills have been inh-oduced both last year and this year that are slowly gaining momentum on this and if nothing else, greatly increasing the awareness of the problem. Recommend the City Council adopt the attached resolution supporting improved funding options for city street improvements. Jtiti:cz Attachment 95 �M Laagus of Mn�n�ofa C.lia� C�v� �� . League of Minnesota Cities 145 UniversityAvenue West, St Paul, MN 55103-2044 (651) 281-1200 • (800) 925-1122 Fax: (651) 281-1299 • TDD: (651) 281-1290 www.lmnc.org Minnesota Cities That Have Adopted Resolutions Supporting Improved Funding Options for City Street Construction and Maintenance Akeley Annandale Apple Valley Argyle Arlington Aurora Austi.n Barnsville Barrett Battle Lake Beardsley Beaver Bay Bellingham Bemidji Benson Bingham Lake Braham Brainerd Brooklyn Center Buhl Burnsville Chaska Champlin Chisholm Cokato Columbia Heights Comfrey Crystal Currie Dawson Dayton Delano Dennison Duluth Dundas Eagan (March 2004) East Bethel Edina Elk River Elmore Emily Eveleth Fairmont Faribault Fergus Falls Forada Fountain Garrison Golden Valley Grand Rapids Granite Falls Grant Hanley Falls Hartland Hastings Hewitt Hoffinan Holdi.ngford Inver Grove Heights Isanti Jackson Keewatin Kimball La Prairie Lake City Lakefield Lakeville Laporte Le Center Little Falls Luverne Lynd Mahtomedi Maple Grove Maple Plain Mayer Melrose Milan Minneota Mounds View Mountain Iron Murdock New Hope New Market North Branch Ogilvie Okabena Olivia Orono Oronoco Ortonville Osakis Osseo Pequot Lakes Pine City Pipestone Plymouth Proctor Richmond Rosemount Rushford Sanbom Sandstone Sartell Sebeka Shafer Silver Bay Spring Lake Park AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER • � St. Cloud St. Louis Park St. Michael St. Pau1 Park South St. Paul Strandquist Tamarack Taunton Twin Valley Vergas Waldorf Walters Wanamingo Waseca Watkins Waverly Welcome Westbrook Woodbury Wykoff Zumbro Falls Zuxnbrota RESOLUTION 2004 - '•± A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING LEGISLATION TO PROVIDE IMPROVED FUNDING OPTIONS FOR CITY STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, Minnesota contains over 135,000 miles of roadway, and over 19,000 miles-or 14 percent--are owned and maintained by Minnesota's 853 cities, and WHEREAS, city streets are a separate but integral piece of the network of roads supportinq movement of people and goods, and WHEREAS, existing funding mechanisms, such as Municipal State Aid (MSA), � property taxes, special assessments and bonding, have limited applications, leaving cities under-equipped to address growing needs, and WHEREAS, maintenance costs increase as road systems age, and no city-large or small-is spending enough on roadway capital improvements to maintain a 50-year lifecycle, and WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Fridley finds it is difficult to develop adequate funding systems to support the City's needed street improvement and maintenance programs while complying with existing State statutes, and WHEREAS, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Minnesota Public Works Association and the City Engineers Association of Minnesota, have jointly sponsored the development of a report entitled Funding Street Construction and Maintenance in Minnesota's Cities wherein (1) the street systems of the cities within the State are inventoried; (2) the existing funding systems are detailed and evaluated; and (3) recommendations are made, and WHEREAS, cities need flexible policies and greater resources in order to meet growing demands for street improvements and maintenance, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY that this Council concurs with the findings of the above referenced report, and fully supports the recommendations contained in that report, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY that this Council supports the adoption of leqislation that would provide cities with the policy options they need to address current and future challenges in providing adequate street improvement and maintenance programs. ADOPTED BY THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL THIS 8TH DAY OF MARCH, 2004. ATTESTED: "- DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK 97 SCOTT J. LUND - MAYOR / � CITY OF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 TO: William W. Bums, City Manager �� - � FROM: Jon .��aukaas, Public Works Director DATE: March 3, 2004 SUBJECT: Dedication of Street Fasement for 69�' Avenue IyE PW04-023 In developing the project with MnDOT to replace the signal system on Tti 4? at 69�' Avenue, we found that the City had never dedicated street easement for the °loop-back° of 69�' Avenue to the frontage road on the east side. The City owns the entire parcel and at the time this was good enough. F�Iowever, under current Federal rules for the use of their funding for this project, we need a separate stxeet dedication. Recommend the City Council approve the attached dedication of sh-eet easement for the existing 69�' Avenue. JFiti:cz Attachment '�'� .- �i :- QUIT CLAIM DEED orm o.-sr ivc Corporation, Partnership or Limited Conveyancing Blanks (1/15/97) L'iability Company to Corporation, 'Partnershi or Limited Liabilit Com an (Top 3 Inches Reurved for Recording Data) _ DEED TAX DUE: $ Date: FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, The City Of Fridley Minnesota - a Municipal Corporation under the laws of Minnesota , Grantor, hereby conveys and quitclaims to The Clty of Fridley Grantee, a Municipal Corporation under the laws of Minnesota, a permanent easement , real property in �oka County, Minnesota, described as fotlows: west three hundred feet of the south four hundred feet of the southeast quarter of the southwest one quarter except that portion previously established for right of way of the existing trunk highwat number 47, all lying in section eleven, township thirty north, - range twenty four west. together with all hereditaments and appurtenances. Check box if applicable: � The Seller certifies that the Seller does not know of any wells on the described real property. O A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document. ❑ I am familiar with the property described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosnre certificate. Affix Deed Tax Stamp Here STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF �� ss. By Its By Its This instrument was acknowledged before me on ace ' by the of under the laws of and • and ,a , on behalf of the Knaak 8� Kantrud, P.A. Frederic W. Knaak City Attomey 3500 �ilow Lake Blvd, Suite 800 Vadnais Heights, MN 55110 (651) 490-9078 .. SIGNATURE OF NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICIAL Check here if part or all of the land is Registered (Torrens) ❑ Tax Statements for the real property described in this instniment should be sent to (include name and address of Grantee): � � cmr aF FRIDLE7 TO: FROM: DATE: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 William W. Bums, City Manager�� Jon ti. aukaas, Public Works Director March 3, 2004 PW04-022 SUBJECT: Resolution and Traffic Conirol Signal Agreement for TIi 47 at 69�' Avenue The attached resolution and agreement sets the scope of work and identifies the payment spiit between MnDOT and the City of Fridley for the signal upgrade on Tli 47 at 69�' Avenue. The project includes a new signal system, new Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption, signal interconnect, and intemaliy illuminated street name signs. The City's estimated share is �18,8�+6 to be paid from our MSAS account This will not have any affect on the money available for our local oi�systern stxeet projects. Recommend the City Council adopt the resolution to approve the Traffic Control Signal Agreement 1`l0. 86310R between MnDOT and the City of Fridley for signal system upgrades at Tf-[ 47 and 69`" Avenue. Jtiti:cz Attachment 100 -J / R$SOLUTION NO. 2004 - gESpLxT�l�i p�Tii�RIZ2NG AN AC�2� I�. 86310R WITH 1�90"�P, DEPAR'II�1'P OF Cfl�T FOR Tf� REPLA�IT OF Zi� TRAFFIC OCH�Tt12�L SYSTFIri CH�T T.H. 47 (ZIldIVERSITY AVffi�1CiS) At�ID 69'IH AVEN� BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Fridley enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for - the following purposes, to wit: Remove the existing Traffic Control Signal and Install a new Traffic Control Signal with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption, Interconnect and Internally Lit Signs on Trunk Highway No. 47 (University Avenue) at 69th Avenue NE in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No. 86310R, a copy of which was before the Council. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the proper City officers be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement and any amendments, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained therein. ADOPTED BY THE FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL THIS 8� DAY OF MARCH, 2004. ATl'EST: DEBRA A. SKOG'EL�T - CITY CLERK 101 S00'I'T J. I�ID - MP.YOR CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota City of Fridley I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the Council of the City of Fridley at a duly authorized meeting � thereof held on the day of , 2004, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. (Seal) Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk 102 MINNESOTA TR.ANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT NO. 86310R BETWEEN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF FRIDLEY TO Remove the existing Traffic Control Signal and Install a new Traffic Control Signal with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption, Interconnect and Internally Lit Signs on Trunk Highway No. 47 (University Avenue) at 69�' Avenue NE in Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota. S.P. 0205-83 S.A.P. 127-010-18 Prepared by Metropolitan District Traffic Engineering ESTIMATED AMOUNT RECEIVABLE City of Fridley $18,846.00 103 AMOUNT ENCUMBERED None Otherwise Covered ti -� I PARTIES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, (State), and the City of Fridley, (City) . - RECITALS Minnesota Statutes Section 161.20 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to enter into agreements with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing, maintaining and improving the Trunk Highway system. The State has determined that there is justification and it is in the public's best interest to remove the existing traffic control signal and install a new traffic control signal including street lights and Interconnect, {Traffic Control Signal) and install internally lit signs, (Internally Lit Signs) on Trunk Highway No. 47 (University Avenue) at 69th Avenue NE. The City requests and the State agrees to the installation of an Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption System, (EVP System), as a part of the new Traffic Control Signal installation. 86310R -1- 104 " ' S It is considered in the public's best interest for the State to provide a cabinet and cantroller (State-furnished Materials) for the new Traffic Control Signal. - The City and the State will participate in the cost, maintenance and operation of the new Traffic Control Signal, EVP System, and Internally Lit Signs. CONTRACT 1. The State will prepare the necessary plan, specifications and proposal, (Preliminary Engineering). The State will also perform all necessary construction inspection, (Construction Engineering). 2. The Cost of Construction, (Construction Cost) consists of the contract cost of the work or, if the work is not contracted, the actual cost of all labor, materials, and equipment rental required to complete the work. Construction Cost does not include the cost of providing the power supply to the service pole or pad. 3. The State, with its own resources or by contract, will remove the existing traffic control signal and install a new Traffic Control Signal, EVP System and Internally Lit Signs on T.H. No. 47 (University Avenue) at 69�' Avenue NE pursuant to 86310R -2- `��F __�� i the plans and specifications for State Project No. 0205-83 and State Aid Project No. 127-010-18 with the Construction Costs shared as follows: a. Traffic Control Signal and EVP System. - Estimated Construction Cost is $209,000.00 which includes a lump sum amount of $19,000.00 for State Furnished Materials State's share is 95 percent. City's share is 5 percent. b. Internally Lit Signs. Estimated Construction Cost is $7,000.00. City's share is 100 percent. 4. Upon execution of this agreement, and award of the Construction Contract and receipt of State's written request, the City will make a lump sum payment to the State of its project costs. The City's project costs will be the sum of the following: a. The City's share (as specified in Paragraph 3) based on the actual bid prices and the lump sum State Furnished Materials costs. 86310R -3- 106 b. Eight percent of its final share [Item (a) above] for the cost of Construction Engineering. 5. The City will be responsible for the cost and application to secure an adequate power supply to the service pad or pole. Upon completion of this project, the City will thereafter pay all monthly electrical service expenses necessary to operate the Traffic Control Signal, Internally Lit Signs and EVP System. 6. Upon completion of this project, the City will, at its cost and expense: (1) maintain the luminaires and all its components, including replacement of the luminaire if necessary; (2) relamp the new traffic control signal and street lights; (3) clean and paint the new traffic control signal, cabinet, and luminaire mast arm extensions; and (4) relamp, maintain and operate the Internally Lit Signs. The State will, at its cost and expense, maintain the interconnect and perform all other traffic control signal and street light maintenance. 7. The EVP System will be installed, operated, maintained, or removed in accordance with the following conditions and requirements: 86310R -4- �� _ • I a) All maintenance of the EVP System must be done by State forces. b) Emitter units may be installed only on authorized emergency vehicles, as defined in - Minnesota Statutes Section 169.01, Subdivision 5. Authorized emergency c) d) vehicles may use emitter units only when responding to an emergency. The City will provide the State's Metropolitan District Engineer or his/her designated representative a list of all vehicles with emitter units. Malfunction of the EVP System must be reported to the State immediately. In the event the EVP System or its components are, in the opinion of the State, being misused or the conditions set forth in Paragraph b above are violated, and such misuse or violation continues after the City receives written notice from the State, the State may remove the EVP System. Upon removal of the EVP System pursuant to this 86310R -5- 108 Paragraph, all of its parts and components become the property of the State. e) Al1 timing of the EVP System will be . determined by the State through its Commissioner of Transportation. 8. Al1 timing of the new Traffic Control Signal will be determined by the State�and no changes may be made except with approval of the State. 9. Each party will be solely responsible for its own acts and omissions, and the results thereof, to the extent authorized by law. The State's liability is governed by the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 3.736. Each party will be solely responsible for its own employees for any Workers Compensation Claims. 10. Upon execution and approval by the City and the State and completion of the Construction work provided for herein, this agreement will supercede and terminate Agreement No. 59571M, dated December 21, 1979, between the parties. 11. Upon execution and approval by the City and the State and completion of the Construction work provided for herein, this agreement will supercede and terminate the - operation and maintenance terms of Agreement No. 67929, dated 86310R -6- 109 __, i :-- � I June 16, 1992 for the intersection of T.H. No. 47 (University Avenue)) at 69th Avenue NE, between the parties. 12. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original Agreement, or their successors in office. 13. If the State fails to enforce any provisions of this Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision or its right to enforce it. 14. This Agreement contains all negotiations and agreements between the parties. No other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party. 15. Minnesota law governs this contract. Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 16. This Agreement is effective on the date the State obtains all required signatures under Minnesota Statutes 16C.05, Subdivision 2, and will remain in effect until terminated by written agreement of the parties. 86310R -7- 110 RECOMMEND FOR APPROVAL: City Attorney CITY OF FRIDLEY By: Mayor Date: By: City Manager Date: 86310R -8- 111 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RECOMMEND FOR APPROVAL: Metropolitan District Engineer COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION As delegated to Materials Management Division By: Date: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION By: State Design Engineer Date: As to form and execution: By: Contract Management Date: 86310R -9- 112 � _� - � _- - � " - Cfl'Y OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: DATE: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 Wiliiam W. Bums City Manager �� • ,, Jon fi. aukaas, Public Works Director Layne Otteson, Asst Public Works Director March 3, 2004 PW04-024 SUBJECT: Change Order No. 3 to 2003 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2003 - 1 During the course of construction on this project, extra work was required to complete the project Staff worked with the Coniractor to identify the work and agree on the cost of the work. F'nre items were identified as part of Change Order #3. l. Repair deteriorated sewer structures. During construction, we found that approximately eight sanitary manholes had adjusting rings that required replacement The rings were disintegrating and would eventually collapse under vehicle load. The depth of the rings were beyond the scope of the projeck, thus the Contractor is entitled to additional payment 2. Grind roots. Very large roots of a tree on Taylor Street were impacted during excavation. The adjacent homeowner and staff discussed resolution and agreed to grind down the roots. 3. Adjust and sawcut manholes. Several catch basins and manholes didn't have adjusting rings. Grades were slightiy changed to improve drainage and the manholes required having the tops cut down to allow piacement of rings. 4. Special Concrete catch basin structure on Fillrnore Street A unique storm sewer grate structure was in need of repairs. This required a lot of form work and hand finishing. This structure catches water before it Flows into a driveway that serves two homeowners. The dweilings are located down hill and could suffer water damage. 5. Street patches on Filimore Street The additional watermain work on Skywood Lane required going onto Fillmore Street to make the required watermain connection. This involved placing Class 5 aggregate and bituminous pavement Also, a pressure reduction vatve was removed on Fillmore Street in this area and also required the replacing of the Class 5 aggregate and bituminous pavement Recommend the City Council approve Change Order I`lo. 3 to tiardrives, Inc. to the 2003 Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2003 � 1 adding to the cost to perform the work to the contract in the amount of �5,449.42. The revised contract amount will be �769,789.38. LO/Jf-IFi:cz - Attachment 113 CITY OF FRIDLEY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 6431 UNIVERSITY AVF�I`[UE N.E. FR(DLEY, MI`i 55432 March 8, 2004 tiardrives, Inc. 14475 Quiram Dr. Rogers MI`I 55374 SUBJECT: Change Order ho. 3, 2003 Street Improvement Project I`lo. ST. 2003 - I Gentlemen: You are hereby ordered, authorized, and instructed to modify your contract for the 2003 Street Improvement Project I`lo. ST 2003 - 1 by adding the fotlowing work: Addition• Item 1 Repair deteriorated sewer structures 2 Grind roots 3 Adjust and sawcut manholes 4� Concrete structure on Fillmore 5 Street patch on Fillmore (Tie in watermain 8� pressure valveJ TOTAL Ct1Al`�GE ORDERS Original Contract Amount Contract Additions � CO I`lo. 1 CO I`lo. 2 CO 1`10. 3 REVISED COI`iTRACT AMOIJnT 114 uanti Unit Unit Cost Total Cost 1 1 1 1 1 L„S [,S L.S L„S L.S 2,047.50 2,047.50 193.30 193.30 461.00 � 461.00 1,6r+7.62 1,647.62 1,100.00 1,100.00 5,449.42 693,360.41 6�,632.00 6,347.55 5,449.�2 a 769.789.38 - _- . i -. � - - _ Flardrives, Inc. _ Change Order I`lo. 3 - March 8, 2004- Page 2 � Submitted and approved by Jon li. Iiaukaas, Pubiic Works Director, on the 8th day of March, �nn�� Jon 11. flaukaas, P.E. Director of Public Works Approved and accepted this day of , 2004 by rt�RtvES, inc. Signature A.pproved and accepted this day of , 2004 by CITY OF FRIDLEY Scott J. Lund, Mayor . Witiiam W. Bums, City Managex 115 f � C�I7 OF FRIDLEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 Wiiliam W. Bums, City Manager �� Jon ti:�'laukaas, Public Works Director March 4, 2004 Award of Sanitary and Storm Sewer Lining Project 1`�0. 354 PW04-018 On Wednesday, February 18, 2004, bids were opened for the Sanitary and Storm Sewer Lining Project I`lo. 354. The project had two parts: (1) restoration of the last piece of corrugated metal pipe sanitary sewer, and (2) lining and joint sealing of a section of 36 in. concrete pipe. The lowest bid was submitted by Michels Pipeline Construction. The sanitary sewer portion of the project is approximately 2,000 LF in length and runs fi-om Tti 65 and Medtronic Parkway along the west side of Moore Lake and then west along Marigold Terrace, Monroe Street and 58�' Avenue. The portion of the bid pertaining to this totals �62,645 to be paid from the Sanitary Sewer fund. The storm sewer portion of the project was to line 142 F of 36 in. RCP and seal the joints on an additional 496 LF. The portion of the bid pertaining to this totals �39,933 to be paid from the Storm Sewer fund. Recommend the City Council receive the bids and award the contr-act for the Sanitary and Storm Sewer Lining Project i`lo. 35� to Michels Pipeline Consiruction of 1`!ew Berlon, WI, in the amount of �102,578. Jt1tl:cz Attachments 116 0 BID FOR PROPOSALS -- . SA1vITARY & STORM SEWER REPAIIt PROJECT NO. 354 WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2004,10:00 A.NL Michels Pipeline Construction AIA $102,578.00 w/grouted joint seals Signed 3600 State Highway West Burnsville MN 55337 Lametti & Sons AIA $117,916.00 Signed 16028 Forest Blvd No Hugo MN 55038 Veit and Companies Inc AIA $149,159.80 Signed 14000 Veit Place Rogers MN 55374 Insituform Central, Inc. AIA $158,211.90 Signed 17988 Edison Ave Chesterfield MO 63005 Visu-Sewer Clean & Seal, Inc. Liberty $163,450.00 Signed 7905 Beech Street NE Fridley MN 55432-1762 Davies Water Equipment NO BID 1694 91st Ave 1VE Blaine MN 55449 Infratech NO BID 21040 Commerce Blvd - Rogers MN 55374 United Rentals Highway NO BID Technologies 4700 Lyndale Avenue North Minnea olis MN 55430 117 5 YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BUDGET 2005 City of Fridley As of 1130104 State of Minnesota Sewer Capital Improvements 2007 Misc sewer line repairs with street project (if needed) Reline sanitary lines : Miss River easement - Craigbrook to 79th 8" VCP & CIP - 1700 ft Replace Cheri Lane lift station with Gorman Rupp submersable enclosed pump station Total 2008 Misc sewer line repairs with street project (if needed) Reline sanitary lines : Central to Hwy 65 10" VCP - 2000 ft 25,000 90,000 � 40,000 15 25,000 •� �� Total $ 115.000 2009 Total $Q 11$ . , 5 YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BUDGET 2005 Cfty of Fridiey As of 1I30/04 State of Minnesota � Storm Capital Improvements 2004 Misc storm sewer line repair/street project upgrade (if needed) Joint Sealing of Storm Lines: 75th Ave. - Central Ave to Hayes Ave. Clean Water Partnership {Springbrook Nature Center) Total 2005 Misc storm sewer line repair/street project upgrade (if needed) Automated Controls @ Locke Lake Dam 2006 Miscellaneous Street Project Upgrades Norton Creek Repair 119 Total Total 25,000 50,000 , 16,000 $ 91.000 25,000 50,000 $ 75.000 25,000 50,000 �� Q1Y QF FRIDLEY Name Sandra Hara , AGENDA ITEM - CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 Position Utility Billing Clerk Non-exempt Appointment Starting Salary $17.13 per hour 120 Starting Date March 9, 2004 Replaces Judith Melham � _� � �J � ,_ crr�r aF FRIDLEY AGENDA ITEM COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 CLAIMS 115490 -115692 121 � � CfiY QF FRI[yLEY AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 LICENSES Tvpe of License By TEMPORARY GAMBLING Fridley Historical Society Robert Christenson 611 Mississippi St NE Fridley, MN 55432 122 Approved By: Public Safety City Clerk Fees: $25 - '9 _ . � ..- City of Fridley AGENDA ITEM City Council Meeting Of Monday, March 08, 2004 Gas Services Angell Aire Inc 12253 Nicollet Ave S Bumsville MN 55337- Haley Comfort Systems Inc 122 3 St W Hastings MN 55033- General Contractor-Residential Chuba Company (1554) 19276 Vemon St NW Elk River MN 55330- Gunnerson Construction (20355987) 8152 Isaak Avenue NW Annandale MN 55302- Heatin Angell Aire Inc 12253 Nicollet Ave S Bumsville MN 55337- Erickson Plbg Htg 8� Cool 1471 92 Lane Blaine MN 55449- Plumbina � Nelson Terry Plumbing Inc 17033 Argon St NW Andover MN 55304- � Craig Angell Dick Klassen Dennis Chuba Curt Gunnerson Craig Angell Ron Erickson Terry Nelson 123 Approved Bv' Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building Official State of MN State of MN Ron Julkowski Building Official Ron Julkowski Building O�cial State of MN Peterson Pinney Inc 4151 Coon Rapids BNd Coon Rapids MN 55433- � Lanny Tumquist 124 Approved Bv: State of MN _ • � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 qTY OF FRIDLEY Date: March 3, 2004 To: William Burns, City Manager �� From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Special Use Permit Request, SP #04-02, Kevin and Paulette Holman M-04-35 INTRODUCTION The petitioners, Kevin and Paulette Holman, are seeking a special use permit to construct a detached garage in their rear yard which is located at 571 79th Way. Their property is located in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District. No structures or buildings can be constructed in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District, without first obtaining a special use permit. The proposed structure must be and is designed and certified by a registered engineer as being in compliance with applicable building codes, including federal standards for flood proofing. The petitioner has submitted all the necessary information needed to meet these requirements, including a certificate of survey, and the elevation and structural notes on the proposed structure. The petitioners have also submitted a variance request to increase the size of a first accessory building from 1,000 square feet to 1,168 square feet and to exceed 100% of the first floor area of their dwelling unit. Please see variance memo for the Appeals Commission recommendation. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the February 18, 2004, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for SP #04-02. After a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of special use permit, SP #04-02, with the stipulations as presented. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. _ PLANNING STAFF RECOMMNEDATION •. City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. 125 STIPULATIONS 1. Petitioner shall obtain ali necessary permits prior to construction. 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary siding, color scheme, roof pitch, and roofing materials. 5. The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate as part of a verifying survey prior to the foundation being capped, which shall verify that the minimum garage floor elevation is 821 feet. 6. The petitioner shall flood-proof the garage in accordance with current Federal and State flood-proofing requirements to a minimum of the 100-year flood elevation. 7. Retaining wall needs to be approved by the City's engineering staff prior to construction and will require a separate building permit. 8. Driveway shall meet code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. 126 �- City of Fridley Land Use Application SP #04-02 February 18, 2004 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Kevin and Paulette Holman 571 79th Way NE Fridley MN 55432 Requested Action: To build a detached garage in a Flood Fringe District. Permit is specifically required for structures proposed to be elevated, but not built on fill. Existing Zoning: R-1 (Single Family Residential) Location: 571 79th Way Size: 9,610 sq. ft. .22 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family Home. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family & R-1 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Park & Public Facilities W: Single Family & R-1 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Section 205.27.4.D requires a special use permit for structures proposed to be elevated, but not built on fill. Zoning History: 1922 — Lot is platted. 1962 — Home is built. 1988 — Deck constructed. Legal Description of Property: Lots 7-9, Block N, Riverview Heights Public Utilities: Home is connected. Transportation: 79tn Way provides access to residence. Physical Characteristics: Typical suburban landscaping. 127 SUMMARY OF PROJECT The petitioners, Mr. and Mrs. Holman, are requesting a special use permit to construct a detached garage in their rear yard, not elevated on fill, in the Flood Fringe District. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit, with stipulations. Structures that are not elevated on fill are a permitted special use in the flood fringe district provided that all FEMA and State flood-proofing regulations and standards provided in the City Code requirements are met. CITY COUNCIL ACTION/ 60 DAY DATE City Council — March 8, 2004 60 Day — March 15, 2004 (Proposed Location of Garage) Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg SP #04-02 REQUEST The petitioners, Kevin and Paulette Holman, are seeking a special use permit to construct a detached garage in their rear yard which is located at 571 79th Way. Their property is located in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District. No structures or buildings can be constructed in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District, without a special use permit. ANALYSIS - The property is located on 79th Way, east of the Mississippi River, with the home fronting on 79th Way. The property is zoned, R-1, Single Family as are the properties to the west, north and east. The property to the south of the subject property is a public � park. The existing home was constructed in 1962. A garage has never existed on this site. _ ., , >�... - - - : _. ,: ; t > . a . . . .. , .. ,� - . 3 . ,. _ _ .., � . � ,� � 'V..' . �. . .. . .... . .�`,.'.'.:�. , , . y L }� l � , .. . _. .. '-:4�n ... . r.. , .. . ._ " �. .. .. � � ..r ,., ..': . .:- ; ... � d .. :.. . � - � � � . . ' ' ._ .. . . _ � - � � m -�. . �. � .: .. � . �.,... � ,4.�� ...-. . . . . - - � . , � ... . . ,. ., � .. . � .._a.-....is.. ��' Exis#ing home City Code states that no buildings or structures can be placed within the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District, unless a special use permit is granted. The proposed structure must be designed and certified by a registered engineer or architect as being in compliance with applicable building codes, including federal standards for flood proofing. The petitioner has submitted all the necessary information needed to meet these requirements, including a certificate of survey, and the elevations and structural notes on the proposed ;. structure. 128 ._ On this particular property, there can be no living area below 823.8 feet in elevation. The proposed garage slab will be located at 821 feet in elevation. A garage is allowed to be below the required elevation for living area because iYs uninhabitable (not living space) space. The foundation, footing and garage slab have all been engineered to meet FEMA requirements. The garage floor is also designed to drain. The garage slab will be located at 821 feet in elevation, the top of the block elevation will be 823.8 feet, and the wood garage structure will start above the 823.8 feet elevation. � . . ,^. Location of proposed garage Tne proposed garage meets all setback and lot coverage requirements. The petitioners have also submitted a variance request to increase the size of a first accessory building from 1,000 square feet to 1,168 square feet and to exceed 100% of the first floor area of the dwelling unit. City staff has not received any comments from neighboring property owners. RECOMMENDATIONS City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit, with sfipulations. Structures that are not elevated on fill are a permitted special use in the flood fringe district provided that all Federal and State flood proofing standards are met. STIPULATIONS _ Staff recommends approval of this special use permit with the following stipulations. -- 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. -- 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 129 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and __ finished with complementary siding, color scheme, roof pitch, and roofing materials. 5. The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate as part of a verifying survey prior to the foundation being capped, which shall verify that the minimum garage floor elevation is 821 feet. 6. The petitioner shall flood-proof the garage in accordance with current Federal and State flood-proofing requirements to a minimum of the 100-year flood elevation. 7. Retaining wall needs to be approved by the City's engineering staff prior to construction and will require a separate building permit. _ 8. Driveway shall meet code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring properiy owners must be filed with the City. 130 r AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 QTY OF FRIDLEY Date: March 3, 2004 � To: Wiliiam Burns, City Manager j� T From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Variance Request, VAR #04-01, Kevin and Paulette Holman, 571 79th Way M-04-36 INTRODUCTION The petitioners, Kevin and Paulette Holman, are seeking two variances in order to allow the construction of a 1,168 square foot detached garage in the rear yard of their residence, which is located at 571 79'h Way. The first variance the petitioners are requesting is to increase the maximum size of a first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,168 square feet. City staff has no recommendation on this variance request as similar variances have been granted in the past. The second variance request is to exceed 100% of the first floor area of their dwelling unit, from 1,118 square feet to 1,168 square feet. City staff has not been able to identify any hardship for this variance request. The property located in the flood plain is a unique condition to the property; however, the petitioner desire to construct a garage larger than the size of the existing home is not a unique condition. A garage of 1,118 square feet (the size of the existing home) would still provide adequate room for vehicle parking and storage space. The petitioners have also requested a special use permit to construct a detached garage in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District. No structures or buildings can be constructed in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District, without first obtaining a special use permit. Please see special use permit memo for the Planning Commission recommendation. 131 APPEALS COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS _ _ First Variance Request — At the February 25, 2004, Appeals Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for VAR #04-01. After a brief discussion, the Appeals Commission recommended approval of the variance to increase the size of the first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,118 square feet. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Second Variance Request — At the February 25, 2004, Appeals Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for VAR #04-01. After a brief discussion, the Appeals Commission recommended denial of the variance to exceed the first floor area of the dwelling, as no similar variances have been granted in the past, and there is no undue hardship. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMNEDATION City Staff recommends concurrence with the Appeals Commission. 132 "� City of Fridley Land Use Application VAR #04-01 February 25, 2004 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Kevin and Paulette Holman 571 79`h Way NE Fridley MN 55432 Requested Action: To increase the minimum floor of a first accessory structure and to exceed 100% of the first floor area of the dwelling unit. Existing Zoning: R-1 (Single Family Residential) Location: 571 79th Way Size: 9,610 sq. ft. .22 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family Home. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family & R-1 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Park & Public Facilities W: Single Family & R-1 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Section 205.07.01.B (4) ((a)) requires that the maximum size of the first accessory structure not exceed 1,000 square feet or 100% of the first floor area of a dwelling unit. Zoning History: 1922 — Lot is platted. 1962 — Home is built. 1988 — Deck constructed. Legal Description of Property: Lots 7-9, Block N, Riverview Heights Public Utilities: Home is connected. Transportation: 79`n Way provides access to residence. Physical Characteristics: Typical suburban landscaping. 133 SUMMARY OF PROJECT The petitioners, Mr. and Mrs. Holman, are seeking a variance to increase the maximum size of a first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,168 square feet. They are also seeking a variance to exceed 100% of the first floor area of their dwelling unit, from 1,118 square feet to 1,168 square feet to allow the construction of a detached garage in the rear yard of their properry. SUMMARY OF HARDSHIP "We are requesfing the additional 168 square feef because since we've lived in our house, we have seen two 100 year floods both resulting to extensive water damage in our basement. Therefore, we have great apprehension in storing items like keepsakes and Christmas decorations in our basement. We are in need of a larger garage due to lack of storage space in our home. ° - Kevin & Paulette Holman SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff has no recommendation on the variance to exceed the size of the first accessory structure over 1,000 square feet as a similar variance has been granted in the past. Similar variance granted: � VAR #94-30 501 Rice Creek Blvd. Variance approved to increase the size of the first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,144 square feet. City Sfaff recommends denial of the variance to exceed the first floor area of the dwelling. � No similar variances have been granted in the past. � No undue hardship CITY COUNCIL ACTIONI 60 DAY DATE City Council — March 8, 2004 (Proposed Location of Garage) Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg VAR #04-01 REQUEST Petitioners, Kevin and Paulette Holman, are requesting two variances in order to allow the construction of a 1,168 square feet detached garage in the rear yard of their residence, which is located at 571 79th Way. They are seeking a variance to increase the maximum size of a first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,168 square feet. They are also seeking a variance to exceed 100% of the first floor area of their dwelling unit, from 1,118 square feet to 1,168 square feet. ANALYSIS The property is located on 79th Way, east of the Mississippi River, with the home fronting on 79th Way. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family as are the properties to the west, north and east. The property to the south of the subject property is a public park. The existing home was constructed in 1962. A garage has never existed on this site. . , . : ,. <,: ,� . _ ; � : ;.: , ,..: , � ew . , . . _ � _ ..._ . �_:� Existing home The subject property is located in the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District. City Code states that no buildings or structures can be placed within the CRP-2, Flood Fringe District, unless a special use permit is granted. The proposed structure must be designed and _ certified by a registered engineer or architect as being in compliance with applicable -. building codes, including federal standards for flood-proofing. The petitioner has � 134 __ submitted all the necessary information needed to meet these requirements, including a certificate of survey, and the elevations and structural notes on the proposed structure. The petitioner has applied for a special use permit that was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission on February 18, 2004. Their request will go before the City Council on March 8, 2004. City Code requires that the first accessory building shall not exceed 100% of the first floor area of a dwelling unit or a maximum of 1,000 square feet. As stated above, the petitioners are seeking to exceed the 1,000 square foot maximum of a first accessory building by 168 square feet. The petitioner's existing home is 1,118 square feet, so not only are the petitioners requesting to exceed the maximum requirement allowed of 1,000 square feet for a first accessory building, but they are also exceeding the first floor area of their dwelling. To allow a garage to be larger than the house is making the house secondary to a larger accessory use , � Location of detached garage VARIANCE HARDSHIP Before the Commission shall grant a variance, it is the responsibility of the applicant to prove that enforcement of the code would case undue hardship because of conditions unique to the property and that if the variance is granted it will be keeping with the intent of the ordinance. Undue hardship as defined by law is: 1. The property cannot be put to reasonable use if used under the requirements of the code. 2. The need for the variance is due to the conditions unique to the _ property and not created by actions of the landowner. -. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the character of the neighborhood. 135 City Staff has not been able to identify any hardship, as defined by the law, that would __ allow staff to recommend anything but denial of the request to allow the 1 St accessory structure to exceed the first floor area of the existing house. The petitioner has not listed out any legally defined hardship in their letter of hardship that would allow the accessory structure to be larger than their home. In reviewing the petitioner's request, staff applied the legal definition of hardship and developed the following analysis: 1. The property cannot be put to reasonable use if used under the requirements of the code. • Property can accommodate an accessory structure of at least 1,000 square feet, which allows adequate room for vehicle parking and storage. 2. The need for the variance is due to unique property conditions. • The property being located in the flood plain is a unique condition to the property, however, the petitioners desire to construct a garage larger than the size of the existing home is not a unique condition. • A garage of 1,118 square feet (the existing size of the home) would still provide adequate room for storage space. 3. The variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. • The code requires that an accessory structure doesn't exceed the size of the home to maintain the residential quality of a neighborhood. Garages that oversize the home dominate the site and the neighborhood. This neighborhood consists mainly of smaller homes, with two car garages. The size of the proposed garage would be out of place in this neighborhood. SUMMARY OF HARDSHIP "We are requesting fhe additional 168 square feet because since we've lived in our house, we have seen 2 100 year floods both resulting to extensive water damage in our basement. Therefore, we have greaf apprehension in storing items like keepsakes and Christmas decorations in our basement. We are in need of a larger garage due to lack of storage space in our home."— also see attached letter from petitioner. - Kevin and Paulette Holman RECOMMENDATIONS Cify Staff has no recommendation on the variance to exceed the size of the first accessory structure over 1,000 square feet as a similar variance has been granted in - fhe past. Similar variance granted: ➢ VAR #94-30 501 Rice Creek Blvd. Variance approved to increase the size of the first accessory structure from 1,000 square feet to 1,144 square feet. _ City Staff recommends denial of the variance to exceed the frrst floor area of the :- dwelling. 136 . � No similar variances have been granted in the past. ➢ No undue hardship. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends that if the variance is granted, the following stipulations be attached. . 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 2. The structure shall not be used for a home occupation or living area. 3. Total square footage of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. 4. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary side, color scheme, roof pitch and roofing materials. 5. All vehicles shall be stored on a hard surface driveway as approved by the City. 6. Driveway shall meet the code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. 137 � r ' i i ��y `Y� 6 v � f' � Y 9�, � �6 w •�"' y �" pr � II �0/WB,,��'.^' m � WY �`\4*i � u W y � �p � � � ��Y �y4 a � F \ w i W y i.qw�- 4 Y O O YY � ! tl � _ i . _ � � i.\ � �� C`��. � �. � � •�, � � � �� .�`., C� `�`�., � � � "e _ . -�. � . �`c' ` � �t" w`—' � � � � � ` {" � � �`.�, �°" � fi9` {�. ,� � . � ` {\'�, y �y c . �� _ ` !i � , 4,, � � � � � t ,w 4' � � � '" � s �. t � � Fti'.. � ��iS] �� O° � � (C1\� ` � M Y ` � e � ' �°i` � , l." Ay �' `i� � � jS�,'� °� . � �y �- ' • o `s �� c (\.�- � � � � � R � �, �'�, \ � � � w • � '`J � � { � • � .r • `� �,- �� \ � 4. � ° ,��. �'� f � - � � i. tC. .� �`�,� �' • � � ya ` �., � � '� � . �\ � �• • � ♦i ° � t. �� ;,4 �: 1 „� . V � 4 `�� e� ` � \. J . � � � � � ° �"" t cd' � � ^ `" � � � � ��— � y ° w � � .��, � � � ` _` � � � . ` J„ f` 1 �v, \ � � . e, y � � ` y� •,` I l � t� � i" � . -.� ' � �� . . .�__� . � ., �' , � c,� ' �� ; t � � � �,;� � � d = „ �`�`�, , o (� � � f � �� <( � f�'` ` � •`��- ° r ��. � �``' � �•.� � � `��' � �� , �, �""i , � � � �,c' � `� � ` � � � " ° `� �, � ` �� ' � `' � ' 1'v � ° - « a , ,`F � � •� r ,� �• `tt�, � � �, �{ `� .,,�� h ,� � � � ` y � t�c ` � � s'� '� O` . e ,• � � .�,� � �� . �� ,, r �� , �, ,� �. � �_ ?� ,� � �; �� 4s � �� . � �� c� � � • m ~ w r w �' . � \ `_ \ t�° � � ` � . F a ` a A � `� � `\ � � � ` � � o I ` ; ' ` � �' � i W • � � (�y � , � � � {\ � 1 , � f t • i�� .wq, • /� • i �`� , �;,� � � T` ,� � o . • W � � �,. • �- �A � �}- u e� o j�y+;" �,� • n o �c� • w w r •�� o o Q• � e w �.'� ♦ m • � a e � • • \ � � Y 0 In@ W G � � r Y' • /9 p • . ` � a N dp py �` O b;� � �s �� 4Y•Vriq��$ . pr � y�� Y� � a 0 tl Y' •� O i p � yi �y � '�`y� � fy �i 9 D 6�• � Y W M N O p y � W � '��g ` , l �' ! �r ,1 � �. t�� t � � � 9 �A'' r � � � � � �� `a, ,`\ t � ,, �r 138 9 �l \�� C'�`'* �`� �'--3"\ �,^�� ,. '"�� "�\./ .�� -' � � \� � F�!'�ry,� l ' � � �.� , �� 0 � � f � \, � h. � �a ! �• l �� \ �� '. '� �` _ ' .� � � QTY dF FRIDLEY Date To: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 March 3, 2004 William Burns, City Manager�i�r From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Pianning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Special Use Permit Request, SP #04-01, Spring Lake Park School District M-04-37 INTRODUCTION The petitioner, Frank Herman, on behalf of Spring Lake Park School District, is requesting a special use permit to allow a classroom for the Life Skills Program to be operated out of the home located at 7517 4"' Street. While private schools are required to obtain a special use permit and public schools are permitted by right, the school district has committed to go through the special use permit process, so like a private school; it can have stipulations placed on it to ensure neighborhood compatibility. In order for a program through the school district to be located within a residential home, all applicable building code and accessibility code requirements must be met. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the February 18, 2004, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for SP #04-01. A number of neighbors spoke against the project. The Commission received a petition (in your packet) requesting that the City deny this special use permit. After a lengthy discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of special use permit, SP #04-01, with stipulations. THE MOTION FAILED TO CARRY ON A 4— 3 VOTE. The Planning Commission then made a motion to recommend denial of special use permit, SP #04-01, with stipulations. THE MOTION WAS APPROVED ON A 4— 3 VOTE. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION City Staff recommends approval of this special use permif request. The R-1 Single Family zoning district allows private schools through a special use permit. 139 The "P", Public zoning district includes land area, waterways and water areas which are owned, controlled, regulated, used or proposed to be used by the City of Fridley or other governmental body. The Public zoning district also states that a"P" district is automatically designated at the time of land purchases for the principa! uses. It then goes on the state that a"P" district upon removal of public use, automatically reverts back to the original zoning that was on the property prior to the taking for such use. A private party will own the subject property and the School District will be renting the property from them. According to the language in the "P" zoning district, if a piece of property is purchased by a public entity, the zoning would automatically become Public. The codes ambiguity makes it unclear if the property is leased, if the land would also automatically become Public. Nonetheless, the School District has agreed to make this request subject to the special use provisions of the R-1, Single Family zoning district to assure neighborhood compatibility, as a private school would be required to do. City staff has met with the City Attorney regarding this request and he has agreed that due to the ambiguity of the code, requesting that the School District go through the special use permit process would provide the best outcome for the School District, City and the neighborhood. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached. 1. Petitioner shall meet all building code and accessibility code requirements prior to the house being used for the Life Skills Program. 2. Parking shall be limited to staff only, no students shall be allowed to drive to the property. 3. School district policies and procedures for loitering, smoking, etc., shall be enforced on the property and adjacent right-of-ways. 4. Use of the property for school activities will be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. 5. Use of the property for school activities will follow the District 16 calendar for the day's classes will be in session. 6. Property shall be properly maintained. 7. A security system with an automatic fire detection system shall be installed in the home to reduce the risk of trespassers or catastrophe. 8. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary siding, color scheme, roof pitch, and roofing materials. 9. The petitioner shall submit an elevation certificate as part of a verifying survey prior to the foundation being capped, which shall verify that the minimum garage floor elevation is 821 feet. _ 10. The petitioner shall flood-proof the garage in accordance with cuRent Federal and State flood-proofing requirements to a minimum of the 100-year flood elevation. 11. Retaining wall needs to be approved by the City's engineering staff prior to construction and will require a separate building permit. 12. Driveway shall meet code requirements and be 3 feet from all property lines or written approval from neighboring property owners must be filed with the City. __ 140 w- City of Fridley Land Use Application SP #04-01 February 18, 2004 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Spring Lake Park School District 8000 Hwy 65 Spring Lake Park MN 55432 Requested Action: Special Use Permit to allow a classroom for the Life Skills Program in the R-1 Single Family Zoning District. Existing Zoning: R-1 (Single Family Residential) Location: 7517 4th Street Size: 10,125 sq. ft. .23 acres Existing Land Use: Single family home. Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Single Family & R-1 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Single Family & R-1 W: Single Family & R-1 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Consistent with Plan Zoning Ordinance Conformance: Sec. 205.07.1.C.(3) requires a special use permit to allow schools to be located in the R-1 Zoning District. Zoning History: 1955 — Lot is platted. 1956 — House is built. 1962 — Attached single stall garage constructed. 1969 — Detached garage is built. 1972 — Attached garage converted to living space. Legal Description of Property: Lot 13, Block 1, Osborne Manor Public Utilities: Home is connected. Transportation: 4th Street provides access to the residence. Physical Characteristics: 141 Typical suburban landscaping. SUMMARY OF PROJECT The petitioner, Frank Herman, who is representing Spring Lake Park School District is seeking a special use permit to allow a classroom for the Life Skills Program to be operated out of the home, which is located at 7517 4"' Street. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit, with stipulations. CITY COUNCIL ACTION/ 60 DAY DATE City Council — March 8, 2004 60 Day — March 15, 2004 ,, Yy.� S . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . Y (Existing Home) Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg SP #04-01 REQUEST The petitioner, Frank Herman, on behalf of Spring Lake Park School District, is requesting a special use permit to allow a classroom for the Life Skills Program to be operated out of the home, which is located at 7517 4`h Street. In order for a program through the school district to be located within a residential home, all applicable building code and accessibility code requirements must be met. ANALYSIS The subject property is zoned R-1, Single Family as are all surrounding properties. Private schools are a permitted special use in the R-1 Single Family zoning district. While private schools are required to obtain a special use permit and public schools are permitted by right, the school district has committed to go through the special use permit process, so like a private school, it can ensure neighborhood compatibility. The property is located on 4th Street, with the home being "squared up" to and fronting on 4th Street. The existing home was built in 1956 and an attached single stall garage was constructed in 1962. In 1969, a detached garage was constructed in the rear yard and in 1972 the attached garage was converted into living space. �-.,; .,_�-�-�. _ _ _.;-<- _ # , . _ AY. M1 � J{, �E �1: 4 �. . ..... . .�_:� .... _ , .. . . ' 3: .'� . ..: ... _ v';" � Cr . . �. -.. . .. '�: . . .. .: �:: _ " . . ...�, . ., .,:__ .. . . . - ..... , .,.. .. . . . � ;` . . � ... :. r.. (y ""tW'�i�-y '�i . . . . . . . . . . . , .. .,, � - .. �� . . � � � � . � . .. . .:. �: , � {':. �:: � - 9 � 2 A.i y A .'x �f'i� rI . e .. � �. . a _ . . � . . .. . �� Existing home _ - John and Susan Kvidera are the owners of the property and the Spring Lake Park _ School District will rent the property from the owners. The Life Skills Program works =_ 142 __ with students in the 9-12 grades. The program teaches students independent living skills that will enable them to function on their own when they graduate or leave the program. Students in this program have been placed in the special education program meeting criteria such as having a leaming disabitity. The goal of the program is to create a small learning environment that focuses on academic skills, works skills, and living skills. The activities planned for the students included: v Learning outside property maintenance ➢ Planning and providing service learning opportunities within the community ➢ Learning to plan menus which will include shopping and preparing lunches - ➢ Providing academic program during school hours The program at the subject property will accommodate 5-7 students and will be used during school hours of 7:30 a.m. to 2:15 p.m. Students will follow the District 16 calendar for the day's classes will be in session and there will be no students or staff staying over night. Students will not be allowed to drive to the property, but will be dropped off around 7:45 a.m. and will be picked up around 2:15 p.m. There are no weekend activities or classes planned. The petitioner held a Community Meeting for the neighborhood surrounding the subject property on February 10, 2004. The intent of the meeting is to provide information about the Life Skills Program and answer any questions the neighborhood may have. The petitioner has indicated that parking will be limited to 2 school district staff, the property has adequate parking space for the two vehicles needed to operate the program. City staff has heard from two neighboring property owners who have had concerns about the eligibility requirements for the students, their property values, and smoking and loitering on the property and street. Staff will let the petitioner speak to the eligibility requirements of the students. The school has policies regarding smoking and loitering and staff has added a stipulation to ensure that the schools policies are being met on this property. Staff has also spoken with the City Assessor and she has stated that using this property for a Life Skills Program by the school district won't impact neighboring properiy values. RECOMMENDATIONS City Sfaff recommends approval of this special use permit request. The R-1 Single Family zoning district allows private schools through a special use permit. The "P", Public zoning district includes land area, waterways and water areas which are owned, controlled, regulated, used or proposed to be used by the City of Fridley or other governmental body. The Public zoning district also states that a"P" district is automatically designated at the time of land purchases for the principal uses. It then �. goes on the state that a"P" district upon removal of public use, automatically reverts �- back to the origina! zoning that was on the property prior to the taking for such use. 143 A private party wili own the subject property and the School District will be renting the __ property from them. According to the language in the "P" zoning district, if a piece of property is purchased by a public entity, the zoning would automatically become Public. The codes ambiguity makes it unclear if the property is leased, if the land would also automatically become Public. Nonetheless, the School District has agreed to make this request subject to the special use provisions of the R-1, Single Family zoning district to assure neighborhood compatibifity, as a private school would be required to do. City staff has met with the City Attorney regarding this request and he has agreed that due to the ambiguity of the code, requesting that the School District go through the special use permit process would provide the best outcome for the School District, City and the neighborhood. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached. 1. Petitioner shall meet all building code and accessibility code requirements prior to the house being used for the Life Skills Program. 2. Parking shall be limited to staff only, no students shall be allowed to drive to the property. 3. School district policies and procedures for loitering, smoking, etc., shall be enforced on the property and adjacent right-of-ways. 4. Use of the property for school activities will be restricted to 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. 5. Use of the property for school activities will follow the District 16 calendar for the day's classes will be in session. 6. Property shall be properly maintained. 7. A security system with an automatic fire detection system shall be installed in the home to reduce the risk of trespassers or catastrophe. 144 - We, the undersigned property owners in the City of Fridley, petition the Honorable City Council to: Disapprove Special Use Permit, SP#04-01 applied by the Spring Lake Park School District to use the properiy at 7514 4�' Street NE, (legal description Lot 13, Block 1 Osbome Manor) as a classroom for the Life Skills Program. (Names of signers must be entered by signature. IF MARRIED, petition must be signed individually by both husband and wife). Name Address , �. �'+J � _ �' r�. � '�i �i�3 � � i� I `�('tf.,Lf�(� ( C? L� ;:1_. .�.'�`.'. '''i .c:" . _ _ ... _ . . ., . i . —.' - -- — - , x (:�`��'� i1 � U 5� wJ� � `�a. r.e.h � �;v q1r� S �� __ -�1. 7�1�� !� 7539� - 4� � n► � 7 �5 S y, s�. �; �� : Z�� y�,� ��f ��; �� G � Si�nature ,� �r - � r "� �c � ��. !� .f'� � ��-s �� =Ti�� i• �ame of Petition C}roulator) ��n ��A4' k, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he/she, and he/she only, personally circulated the foregoing paper, that all the signatures appended thereto were made in'his/her presence, and that he/she believes them to be the genuine signatures of the persons whose names the purport to be. � Signed Signature Circulator) State of Minnesota } County of Anoka } .��'' Subscribed, sworn to, and acknowled�ed before me this %� day of , 20�by ■ - � .w cHEFm. n. oAV�s �;-:'-��. - r , �� rar�+r weucMU�o'r� y � ,�"�;�k.: Nrr co�ueeaN €w�� at�ooe � r 145 �� Notary Public �tN '� We, the undersigned property owners in the City of Fridley, petition the Honorable City Council to: Disapprove Special Use Permit, SP#04-01 applied by the Spring Lake Park School District to use the property at 7514 4'� Street NE, (legal description Lot 13, Block 1 Osborne Manor) as a classroom for the Life Skills Program. (Names of signers must be entered by signature. IF MARRIED, petition must be signed individually by both husband and wife). Name Address f7 r' nr �"�'t. .��_ ��i!f! el.h t.[��i'1 �'7�v� �� 7�- 1�� 4"`>.�G 6� . /-9 C�Gtr'� S7 % ,d..t,�.; C h/ %.� :? S `{ �hS�. %� �. ! ��t � '! i �sv c., , .;� c .`! L =} '� ' �.i,� J_�— _`r '� /6•n-hc�y- �.7�„�i f A� � ` j�-• t i c�,,� i�x. � t �<<� z. ,z�_ ., �QM� �11� ---� � o �'..,-�� yt ll`r �: sr'1�'L c: r1 .��7H R�.� I�l � s� rn� �! � � .i '/ /� 4' �r �, "� il.f f. . r _,7 � ., � L! '`' < -t /b` J . f ��` ff�'� �� . �?.^ ��`� v" �\ `�.�." � Sr f �i .� �"�`► S f �152:�� -i'�� Si� - � ?s:. y:u , �v:2 t. M1. � t'S � S'�.• - �.�1 , � . ��7 ! ' � � � � .�: ; 7s 5�I � �'1� si �rJ.� �5 /� �� 5r, �'� 3 J F� r� s�`" .4�' �- ��i� ��r� � i %!� Signature � �/ /• C-�-.'�1, a ..n ' G'7 i f��i.� G��_.�'_�= ,.-�-� _� r � -..�...., ��- _,.�.�.,�,,,.-�.,_ .. .__ �-' -�- .-� .�u.., �- - ,.: . � �� ` fnr �C �\� `� �1 � �� L1.. � � .� f�'Z�, ��--i--�,._ � .. � � , , � , I, �• - (Name of Petition Circulator) F., ��,�,�� Lhv� s�'�a�,s��-s be�g duly sworn, deposes and says that he/she, and he/she only, personally circulated the foregoing paper, that all the signatures appended thereto were made in his/her presence, and that he/she believes them to be the genuine signatures of the persons whose names they purport to be. Sign�//%".�'�-' - �1�,��1— (Signature of Circulator) State of Minnesota. } County of Anoka } Subscribed, sworn to, and acknowledged before me this � D day of P. �� 20O by JAC�UELINE ANN BLACKMUN " Notary Public Mmnesota ry �o„ �s �uxr st xoos 146 — i ��=��'�„_ ,�✓/ Notary Public = We, the undersigned property owners in the City of Fridley, petition the Honorable City Council to: Disapprove Special Use Permit, SP#04-01 applied by the Spring Lake Park School District to use the property at 7514 4�' Street NE, (legal description Lot 13, Block 1 Osbome Manor) as a classroom for the Life Skills Program. (Names of signers must be entered by signature. IF MARRIED, petition must be signed individually by both husband and wife). Name `�� l� f f� s� � � Address �� f' �S=S�' -� �.5�- ��'L �7 5�' s �"�' ��'1�� 7.5 3 G 5� �-�' .-,3 ��= �-F � K 6' -t- / j 5�� J�� .c d�`'� x G- ��.5�/D �; � ?�� e� � �' %'i�.�i � � �' '7i7 P �`i G C 7��`� .� � � l� �. d ?, Si a�ure � �r � ---�'_� , ��.,.� �� .� �: � r � (Name of Petition Circulator) �;�� ,,, �4 �►,��,;� being duly sworn, deposes and says that he/she, and he/she only, personally circulated the foregoing paper, that all the signatures appended thereto were made in his/her presence, and that he/she believes them to be the genuine signatures of the persons whose names they purport�to be. // �Signed`''��.�.,� `- (Signature of Circulator) State of Minnesota } County of Anoka } Subscribed, swom to, and acknowledged before me this � day of �' °� 2(b.�by ,,..` JACQUEUNE ANN BLACKMUN _ s Notary Public Mi�r�esota Ml' Goarn�fo� E�pia.qawf'91. TD05 147 .�� ' .��'�� %i�� /` Notary Public /� � AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 CRY OF FRIDLEY Date: March 3, 2004 To: Wiliiam Burns, City Manager �►� � From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Public Hearing for Rezoning Request, ZOA #04-01, John DeMello, Profitmax Inc. M-04-33 INTRODUCTION John DeMello of Profitmax, Inc., is requesting a rezoning for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64'h Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the February 18, 2004, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for ZOA #04-01. After receiving public comment and discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of rezoning request, ZOA #04-01, with the 22 stipulations as presented. THE MOTION CARRIED BY A 6 TO 1 VOTE. Since the February 18, 2004, the petitioner has submitted a new site plan. The new site plans shows the walking path allow the east side of the property connecting to the walking path along Mississippi Street. It also shows a new parking layout for the commercial complex, which meets the parking requirements and also provides an area for proof of parking, if more parking is ever needed. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMNEDATION City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of all land use requests, above. 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to -. the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 148 __ 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A- 5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64th Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. - 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a - building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run- off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13.A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet). 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21.The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 149 City of Fridiey Land Use Application -- ZOA #04-01 & PS #04-01 February 18, 2004 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Applicant: Profitmax Inc. John DeMello 2872 17ih Terrace NW New Brighton MN 55112 Requested Action: Rezone property from C-1, C-2, and R-1 to S-2. Replat Location: 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 C�ntral Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue, 1341 64t" Avenue, 1357 64"' Avenue Existing Zoning: 1314 Mississippi St. — C-2, General Business 1340 Mississippi St. — R-1, Single Family 6401 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business 6421 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business 8� R-1, Single Family 6441 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business & R-1 Single Family 6461 Central Avenue — C-2, General Business 1341 64`� Avenue — R-1, Single Family 1357 64th Avenue — R-1, Sinq�e Family__ Size: Approximate size of entire area to be rezoned and replatted: 179,348 sq. ft. 4.1 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family homes, small commercial building (garage), and vacant land Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Commercial building & C-2 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Single Family homes & C-1 and R-1 W: Vacant land and Restaurant & S-2 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Future Land Use Map designates this area as Redevelopment. Zoning History: 1314 Mississiqpi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1952 — House is built. 1959 — Detached garage built. 1340 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage constructed pre-1949. 6401 Central Avenue: 150 1941 — Lot is platted. House constructed prior to 1949. 1951 — Garage built. 1959 — Addition to house. 1975 — Detached garage built. 6421 Central Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage built prior to 1949. 6441 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot. 1941 — Lot is platted. 1969 — Proposal to build a Tastee-Freez. 1998 — Rezoning request from C-1 to R-1, withdrawn prior to Planning Commission. 6461 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot 1941 — Lot is platted. 1341 64"' Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1974 — House and garage are built. 1985 — SUP issued, second accessory is built. 1994 — Deck is built. 1357 64�' Avenue: a 974 — House and garage are built. 1985 - Deck is built. 1988 — Side yard setback variance granted, garage addition built. Legal Description of Property: 1314 Mississippi Street: Lot 16, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1340 Mississippi Street: Lot 15, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6401 Central Avenue: Lot 20, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6421 Central Avenue: Lot 19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6441 Central Avenue: Lot 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6461 Central Avenue: Lot 17, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1341 64�' Avenue: The W 75 ft of E 184 ft of lot 20 Blk 1, Spring Valley, subj to ease of rec 1357 64th Avenue: The W 75 ft of E 109 ft of Lot 20 Blk 1, Spring Valley, subj to ease of rec Council Action /60 Day Date: City Council — March 8, 2004 60-Day Date — March 15, 2004 = 2 Rezoning and Plat SUMMARY OF REQUEST The petitioner, John DeMello, of Profitmax Inc., is requesting to replat and rezone the properties located at 1314 Mississippi St., 1340 Mississippi St., 6401 Central Ave., 6421 Central Ave., 6441 Central Ave., 6461 Central Ave., 1341 64th Ave., and 1357 64�' Ave., from C-1, Local Business, C-2 General Business, and R-1 Single Family to S-2 Redevelopment District for the purpose of redevelopment, to allow for a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this plat, rezoning and subsequent masfer plan request. ■ Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. ■ Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. ■ Provides additional job opportunities. Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg 151 ZOA#04-01 & PS#04-01 OVERVIEW The requests: John DeMeilo of Profitmax, Inc., is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to construct 71 senior owner-occupied condominium units and a retail complex on the southwest corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The finro actions being requested are a Plat and a Rezoning, all; with the master plan approval will be examined individually in this report. A Plat is being requested to create two new parcels, from 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant), 1341 64th Avenue and 1357 64'h Avenue. A 13,420 retail complex will occupy the northern parcel and the southern parcel will be used for the construction of the 71 senior condominiums. The petitioner is also requesting a rezoning for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64�' Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. Proposed Project: John DeMello, Profitmax Inc., is proposing to construct a 13,420 square foot retail complex on the north portion of the development. The petitioner has stated that he envisions that this complex will house neighborhood retail businesses, which may include a pharmacy, a coffee shop, an ice cream/sandwich shop and a hair salon. The retail complex will include at least 54, 10 foot wide parking stalls for customers. The petitioner is proposing a 4-story 71-unit independent senior condominium complex for the southern portion of the development. The proposed 71 units will be owner-occupied and comprised of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units. There will be four 1-bedroom units that will be 845 square feet in size and eight 1-bedroom units with a den, 1,020 square feet in size. There are fifty-six 2 bedroom and 2-bedroom plus den units planned that will vary 152 s � - in square footage from 1,157-1,515 in size. There will be three 3-bedroom units that wiil be 1,610 square feet in size. The development will include 73 underground parking stalls and 30 surface parking stalls. The petitioner plans to model the exterior of both projects after an Italian villa. The site will include several ponds, a gazebo, and a trail system with landscaping that surrounds the property. SITE HISTORY The proposed development area is located on the southeast comerof Mississippi Street and Central Avenue. The area consists of 2 vacant lots, which are located on Central Avenue and 4 homes that were constructed prior to 1952, 2 of which are located on Mississippi Street and the other 2 are located on Central Avenue. The 2 existing homes on 64th Avenue were constructed in 1974. The petitioners' father, Frank DeMello purchased the vacant parcel located 6461 Central Avenue, 25 years ago. When the property at 1314 Mississippi Street came up for sale over the summer of 2003, the petitioner purchased it with the hope of developing the land. The petitioner then contacted surrounding property owners to see if they would be interested in selling their properties. When the neighboring property owners became interested in selling their properties, the petitioner came forward with this redevelopment project. ANALYSIS Rezoning Requesf ZOA #04-01 The petitioner is requesting a rezoning and master �plan approval for the east side of Central Avenue befinreen Mississippi Street and 64t Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. The properties requesting to be rezoned are 1314 Mississippi Street (single family home and garage (welding shop), zoned C-2, General Business), 1340 Mississippi Street (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family), 6401 Central Avenue (single family home, zoned C-1, Local Business), 6421 Central Avenue (single family home, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant lot, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant lot, zoned C-2, General Business), 1341 64�' Avenue (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family), and 1347 64th Avenue (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family). The petitioner is proposing to redevelop this entire area. � � �� a �` 131d �' � �4.; f W I � A i �'. O � �� = 1 � i 64�t 1 �- � • �� n � 642'I � � � � � s � � 6401 � � �r � 153 2 Zoning Map — Shows mix of zoning and properties to be replatted and rezoned. As the properties exist today, 2 of them have split zoning befinreen C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family. While both of the lots are rather large in size, conflicts arise when the zoning is split befinreen a commercial and residential zoning. Rezoning a property to S-2 Redevelopment District, requires that the accompanying site plan become the master plan for the site. If the rezoning and master plan were approved by the City Council any modification of the site plan would need to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Review of the master plan would also need to be completed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority as the property is in a Redevelopment District. The City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. State Statute gives the City the authority to "rezone" property from one designated use to another, so long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held befinreen 1998 and 2000 and is a`�ool intended to he/p guide future growfh and development of the community...lt is a plan because it contains goals, policies and strategies that all work together, looking to the future and working towards achieving a community wide vision". In order for a rezoning to be viewed favorably, it must be in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed retail complex, senior owner-occupied condominium complex and rezoning of the properties meet several of the objectives the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the Comprehensive Plan. The area of Old Central befinreen Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road was identified as an area for future redevelopment. The purpose of redevelopment is to provide the opporfunity for more efficient land uses and eliminate inefficient land uses and under ufilized parcels. Redevelopment can also provide an opportunity to build new facilifies, meet current markef demands and desires of the City, creates new fax base, and creates additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the rezoning of these properties. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states that for this portion of Old Central, "consideration should be made to replacing the current mix of single-family residential and commercial uses with higher density residential development that together with the health club may serve as an attractive residential location for move-up housing". The Comprehensive Plan also states that for projects in these redevelopment areas requiring rezoning that the S-2 zoning designation "would be the appropriate Zoning district to implement for the redevelopment project. The intent of the district is to provide fhe City with �ite plan review authority to defermine if the proposed project meets the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plans". 3 - 154 _ The Comprehensive Pian, in both the Future Land Use & the Housing chapters, addresses the desire for a variety of housing types in a number of goals listed below. • Ensure that adequate opportunities exist for the development of a variety of housing types at a range of affordability levels including low, low-moderate and high cost housing to meet the life-cycle needs of Fridley residents. • Create sustainable, self-reliant, mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhoods that contribute positively to the quality of life and image of Fridley. • Ensure a variety of housing fypes for people in all stages of fhe life cycle. • Strengthen neighborhoods and improve upon fhe quality of the City's housing stock. • Diversify the housing supply fo include move up housing both in the form of rental and owner occupied housing. As Fridley's residents continue to age, demand will increase for °empty nester" and senior housing. There will be an increased demand for senior rental, senior owned condominium/town homes, and assisted living facilities. The proposed project, 71 senior owner-occupied condominium units, will meet some of the current demand for those seniors seeking alternatives to their current housing type. Rezoning these properties helps to achieve the Comprehensive Plan's goal for this area. Plat Request #04-01 John DeMello, Profitmax Inc., is seeking to replat the properties located at 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue, 1341 64�' Avenue and 1357 64th Avenue to create two separate lots. One of the newly created lots will accommodate the retail complex and the other lot will be used to allow for the construction of a 71-unit owner occupied senior condominium development. The proposed replat witl consist of finro lots; Lot #1 and Lot #2, Block 1, Spring Valley Estates. Rezoning a property to S-2, Redevelopment District allows for the maximum flexibility for a redevelopment project; however, City staff asked the petitioner to design their project to try to meet the zoning classification codes most similar to their intended use. The proposed Lot #1 will accommodate the 13,420 square foot retail complex. Retail complexes like the one proposed are typically zoned C-2, General Business. Proposed Lot #1 is 62,690 square feet in size, which exceeds the minimum lot area requirement for the C-2, General Business District. Proposed Lot #1 also meets all the parking requirements for the number of parking stalls required for a retail use. 155 4 The proposed Lot #2 is approximately 116,658 square feet (2.68 acres) in size. The petitioner is proposing to construct 71 senior owner occupied condominium units. The development will include 73 underground parking stalls and 30 surface parking stalls. Because of the underground parking and the high water table in this area, the height of the building will be 45 feet at the midspan. Early discussions with Anoka County indicated that additional right-of-way on Central Avenue and Mississippi Street will be required for future reconstruction purposes. They anticipate that a 120 ft. right-of-way corridor will be required for both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersections in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. The County assumes when the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection is reconstructed, it would be centered in the 120 ft. right-of-way corridor. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and 10 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. Therefore, staff assumes that the County will be requesting that at this time, both of the right-of-ways be dedicated. The petitioner has drawn the site plan to illustrate right-of- way acquisition along both County Roads. Due to necessity of right-of-way acquisition, the parking setback for the retail space will be 2 feet from the north and west property lines. The parking setback on the senior condominium complex will also be 2 feet from the west property line. As stated above, due to the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setbacks can be recognized under this rezoning master plan approvaL HOUSING STUDY The petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc., to complete a Market Feasibility Study for Senior Housing in Fridley. The demographic and competitive market analysis done by Maxfield indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 189 for-sale housing units. Ma�eld's research pointed out that given the competitive situation in the marketplace, the quality of the subject site, and the lack of for-sale product within three miles of the property, the senior condominium project would be the most marketable _ product for the site. Their research also showed that the subject site could best support -� 5 156 an age-restricted owner-occupied development such as a condominium or cooperative of around 70 units. TRAFFIC Staff utilized a number of sources to determine the possible impacts that 71 senior owner occupied condominium units and the commercial complex may have on the local traffic patterns. Staff consulted the Transportation chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and reviewed the traffic study supplied by TDI, Traffic Date Incorporated. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER The City's Comprehensive Plan indicated that in 2001, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed senior condominiums carried 8,000 vehicles per day and, at this traffic level, was only carrying 57% of the traffic for which the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates Old Central carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2020, based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles / day, Ofd Central will be carrying 71 % if the maximum amount of traffic for which the roadway was designed. REVIEW OF TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT PREPARED BY TDI, INC. Profitmax Inc., hired TDI, Traffic Data Incorporated, a Data Collection, Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning firm to perform a traffic analysis. The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, which was published in December 2003. The consultants used the Senior Adu/t Housing Attached category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed senior complex would generate a total of 247 trips per day. The consultants used the Specialfy Retail Center category from the ITE manual and determined that the proposed retail complex would generate a total of 598 trips per day. ri Generation ITE Description Land Use 252 Senior Adult Housing — Attached (71 units) 814 Specialty Retail Center — t13.500 sq. ft.) Daily I AM Peak Hour Trips 247 598 In Out 3 3 n/a n/a PM Peak Hour In Out 5 3 16 21 TDI developed traffic forecasts for the following 2005 scenarios: ➢ No Build (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Elderly Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) ➢ Build Spring Valley Estates (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Elderly Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) The finding of these forecasts show that the level of service at both the Central Avenue/64th Avenue intersections and the Mississippi StreeUCentral Avenue 157 : intersections would remain the same in the no-build or build scenarios. The only change seen is during the AM Peak Hour at the Central Avenue/64th Avenue eastbound intersection, where the level of service would change from LOS B to LOS C. Central Avenue/64T" Avenue Westbound & Eastbound A roach LOS Results AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Westbound Eastbound Westbound Eastbound 2005 No-Build A B C C 2005 Build A C C - — -C Mississi i StreetlCentral Avenue Intersection LOS Results Scenario AM Peak Hour 2005 No-Build C 2005 Build C PM Peak Hour D D To complete the traffic study, the consultants also referred to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which governs the use of traffic control devices per Minnesota State Statute. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has eight criteria (called warrants) to consider when determining if a traffic signal should be installed at an intersection or not. These warrants are primarily based on the traffic volumes flowing through the intersection. A warrant analysis was conducted for the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. To complete this analysis, TDI staff performed a turning movement count from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Mississippi StreeUCentral Avenue intersection. None of the eight warrants are met under the existing conditions, nor will they be met if the elderly housing and retail buildings are constructed on the proposed site. According to this analysis, a traffic signal should not be installed at the intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue until at least one of the warrants is being met. The conclusions of TDI's analysis state that the stop controlled approaches at the Central Avenuel64th Avenue intersection operate at LOS C or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic control. The intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue will operate at LOS D or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic controls. A traffic signal is not currently warranted at the intersection and a traffic signal will not be warranted at the intersection after the proposed development is completed. A complete copy of the traffic study is available upon request. WETLAND The petitioner has been working with the Rice Creek Watershed to determine in the project area has a wetland. The petitioner has hired Tom Bremen, with Acorn Consulting, to delineate the site for any possible wetlands. Currently, both the petitioner and the Rice Creek Watershed are waiting for the delineators report. PHASING PLAN The petitioner has indicated to staff that their intentions are to building the entire 71 unit senior owner-occupied condominium project all in one construction phase. If the bank required unit pre-sales are slower than predicated by the market report, then they plan 7 158 _ to phase the project. Phasing the project would involve constructing the senior complex in 2 phases (2 buildings). The first phase would be 35 units and the second phase would be the remaining 36 units. Phase one would commence upon selling the bank required percentage of units in the first half of the building, removal of the existing homes and soil corrections. Phase one would tentatively commence in August 2004. Phase two would commence when the pre-sales are met for the first part of the 2"d half of the building. In the meantime, sod, landscaping, and parking would be installed. Phase 3 involves the retail space. Simultaneously, with the residential property, the retail building would be pre-leased. When the building is completely leased, the building � will be constructed. Please see the attached phasing plan in your packet. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT PROCESS During the public hearings for the senior condominiums for Town Center Development, City staff heard many comments from neighboring property owners. Some of the concerns raised were regarding traffic and a guarantee that the tenants of the complex would be 55 or older. To alleviate those concerns ahead of time, the petitioner has provided city staff with a traffic study and a copy of the proposed association documents upon submittal of the rezoning and plat request. Staff also heard a concern regarding a drainage issue on properties south of 64�' Avenue. Reviewing history showed that improvements have been made to the storm sewer system north of 64th Avenue and that all the storm water from the north is diverted west to the much larger storm sewer system in Central Avenue. There is no connection between the storm sewer system north and the problem identified from the resident south of 64th Avenue. STAFF RECOMMEDATION City Staff recommends approval of this Rezoning ZOA #04-01 and accompanying site plan for the senior building and retail complex, wifh stipulations. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provides housing opportunities for seniors. � Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. • Provides additional job opportunities in Fridley City Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for PS#04-01, with stipulations. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of all land use requests above. 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A- 5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. -' 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 159 � 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64`h Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run- off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13.A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. � 160 � � C7TY OF FRIDLEY Date: To: AGENDA ITEM CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 March 3, 2004 William Burns, City Manager �c�� From: Scott Hickok, Comrnunity Development Director Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: First Reading for Rezoning Request, ZOA #04-01, John DeMello, Profitmax Inc. M-04-34 INTRODUCTION John DeMello of Profitmax, Inc., is requesting a rezoning for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64th Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the February 18, 2004, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for ZOA #04-01. After receiving public comment and discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of rezoning request, ZOA #04-01, with the 22 stipulations as presented. THE MOTION CARRIED BY A 6 TO 1 VOTE. Since the February 18, 2004, the petitioner has submitted a new site plan. The new site plans shows the walking path allow the east side of the properiy connecting to the walking path along Mississippi Street. It also shows a new parking layout for the commercial complex, which meets the parking requirements and also provides an area for proof of parking, if more parking is ever needed. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMNEDATION City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of all land use requests, above. 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 161 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A- 5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64th Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regutations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run- off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13.A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 162 - City of Fridley Land Use Application ZOA #04-01 8� PS #04-01 February 18, 2004 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Appiicant: Profitmax Inc. John DeMello 2872 17th Terrace NW New Brighton MN 55112 Requested Action: Rezone property from C-1, C-2, and R-1 to S-2. Replat Location: 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue, 1341 64�h Avenue, 1357 64"' Avenue Existing Zoning: 1314 Mississippi St. — C-2, General Business 1340 Mississippi St. — R-1, Single Family 6401 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business 6421 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business 8� R-1, Single Family 6441 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business & R-1 Single Family 6461 Central Avenue — C-2, General Business 1341 64t'' Avenue — R-1, Single Family 1357 64th Avenue — R-1, Single Family Size: Approximate size of entire area to be rezoned and replatted: 179,348 sq. ft. 4.1 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family homes, small commercial building (garage), and vacant land Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Commercial building & C-2 E: Single Family 8� R-1 S: Single Family homes & C-1 and R-1 W: Vacant land and Restaurant & S-2 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Future Land Use Map designates this area as Redevelopment. Zoning History: 1314 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1952 — House is built. 1959 — Detached garage built. 1340 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage constructed pre-1949. 6401 Central Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. House constructed prior to 1949. 1951 — Garage built. 1959 — Addition to house. 1975 — Detached garage built. 6421 Central Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage built prior to 1949. 6441 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot. 1941 — Lot is platted. 1969 — Proposal to build a Tastee-Freez. 1998 — Rezoning request from C-1 to R-1, withdrawn prior to Planning Commission. 6461 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot 1941 — Lot is platted. 1341 64�' Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1974 — House and garage are built. 1985 — SUP issued, second accessory is built. 1994 — Deck is built. 1357 64�' Avenue: 1974 — House and garage are built. 1985 - Deck is built. 1988 — Side yard setback variance granted, garage addition built. Legal Description of Property: 1314 Mississippi Street: Lot 16, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1340 Mississippi Street: Lot 15, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6401 Central Avenue: Lot 20, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6421 Central Avenue: Lot 19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6441 Central Avenue: Lot 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6461 Centrat Avenue: Lot 17, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1341 64�h Avenue: The W 75 ft of E 184 ft of lot 20 Blk 1, Spring Valley, subj io ease of rec 1357 64�' Avenue: The W 75 ft of E 109 ft of Lot 20 Blk 1, Spring Valley, subj to ease of rec _ Council Action / 60 Day Date: City Council — March 8, 2004 60-Day Date — March 15, 2004 163 � SUMMARY OF REQUEST The petitioner, John DeMello, of Profitmax Inc., is requesting to replat and rezone the properties located at 1314 Mississippi St., 1340 Mississippi St., 6401 Central Ave., 6421 Central Ave., 6441 Central Ave., 6461 Central Ave., 1341 64�' Ave., and 1357 64�h Ave., from C-1, Local Business, C-2 General Business, and R-1 Single Family to S-2 Redevelopment District for the purpose of redevelopment, to allow for a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS City Staff recommends approval of this plat, rezoning and subsequent master plan request. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. ■ Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. • Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. ■ Provides additional job opportunities. Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg 164 Rezoning and Plat = = � ZOA#04-01 & PS#04-01 OVERVIEW The requests: John DeMello of Profitmax, Inc., is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to construct 71 senior owner-occupied condominium units and a retail complex on the southwest corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The two actions being requested are a Plat and a Rezoning, all; with the master plan approval will be examined individually in this report. A Plat is being requested to create two new parcels, from 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant), 1341 64th Avenue and 1357 64th Avenue. A 13,420 retail complex will occupy the northern parcel and the southern parcel will be used for the construction of the 71 senior condominiums. The petitioner is also requesting a rezoning for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64th Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. Proposed Project: John DeMello, Profitmax Inc., is proposing to construct a 13,420 square foot retail complex on the north portion of the development. The petitioner has stated that he envisions that this complex will house neighborhood retail businesses, which may include a pharmacy, a coffee shop, an ice cream/sandwich shop and a hair salon. The retail complex will include at least 54, 10 foot wide parking stalls for customers. The petitioner is proposing a 4-story 71-unit independent senior condominium complex for the southern portion of the development. The proposed 71 units will be owner-occupied _. and comprised of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units. There will be four 1-bedroom units that will � be 845 square feet in size and eight 1-bedroom units with a den, 1,020 square feet in size. There are fifty-six 2 bedroom and 2-bedroom plus den units planned that will vary _- , 165 in square footage from 1,157-1,515 in size. There will be three 3-bedroom units that will be 1,610 square feet in size. The development will include 73 underground parking stalls and 30 surface parking stalls. The petitioner plans to model the exterior of both projects after an Italian villa. The site will include several ponds, a gazebo, and a trail system with landscaping that surrounds the property. SITE HISTORY The proposed development area is located on the southeast corner of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue. The area consists of 2 vacant lots, which are located on Central Avenue and 4 homes that were constructed prior to 1952, 2 of which are located on Mississippi Street and the other 2 are located on Central Avenue. The 2 existing homes on 64th Avenue were constructed in 1974. The petitioners' father, Frank DeMello purchased the vacant parcel located 6461 Central Avenue, 25 years ago. When the property at 1314 Mississippi Street came up for sale over the summer of 2003, the petitioner purchased it with the hope of developing the land. The petitioner then contacted surrounding property owners to see if they would be interested in selling their properties. When the neighboring property owners became interested in selling their properties, the petitioner came forward with this redevelopment project. ANALYSIS Rezoning Request ZOA #04-01 The petitioner is requesting a rezoning and master �lan approval for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64t Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. The properties requesting to be rezoned are 1314 Mississippi Street (single family home and garage (welding shop), zoned C-2, General Business), 1340 Mississippi Street (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family), 6401 Central Avenue (single family home, zoned C-1, Local Business), 6421 Central Avenue (single family home, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant lot, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant lot, zoned C-2, General Business), 1341 64`h Avenue (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family), and 1347 64th Avenue (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family). The petitioner is proposing to redevelop this entire area. 2 � ��,�) �� (,: 13i� � � � A i . _....°:i` . �..�: O 6461 � j { j �� .�� . i� �I �2, __� � ,�j ti �� i � s4o� . j 1 � I � L. �.� �. r � 2 166 Zoning Map — Shows mix of zoning and properties to be replatted and rezoned. As the properties exist today, 2 of them have split zoning befinreen C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family. While both of the lots are rather large in size, conflicts arise when the zoning is split between a commercial and residential zoning. Rezoning a property to S-2 Redevelopment District, requires that the accompanying site plan become the master plan for the site. If the rezoning and master plan were approved by the City Council any modification of the site plan would need to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Review of the master plan would also need to be completed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority as the property is in a Redevelopment District. The City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. State Statute gives the City the authority to "rezone" property from one designated use to another, so long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000 and is a"tool intended to help guide future growth and development of the community...lt is a plan because it contains goals, policies and strategies that all work together, looking to the future and working towards achieving a community wide vision°. In order for a rezoning to be viewed favorably, it must be in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed retail complex, senior owner-occupied condominium complex and rezoning of the properties meet several of the objectives the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the Comprehensive Plan. The area of Old Central between Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road was identified as an area for future redevelopment. The purpose of redevelopment is fo provide the opportunity for more efficient land uses and eliminate ine�cient fand uses and under utilized parcels. Redevelopment can also provide an opportunity to build new facilities, meef current market demands and desires of the City, creafes new tax base, and creates additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the rezoning of these properties. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states that for this portion of Old Central, "consideration should be made to replacing the current mix of single-family residential and commercial uses wifh higher density residential development that together with the health club may serve as an attractive residential location for move-up housing". The Comprehensive Plan also states that for projects in these redevelopment areas requiring rezoning that the S-2 zoning designation "would be the appropriate Zoning disfrict to implement for the redevelopment project. The intent of the district is to provide the City with site plan review authority to determine if the proposed project meets the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plans". 167 3 The Comprehensive Plan, in both the Future Land Use & the Housing chapters, addresses the desire for a variety of housing types in a number of goals listed below. • Ensure that adequate opporfunities exist for the development of a variety of housing types at a range of affordability levels including low, low-moderate and high cost housing to meet the life-cycle needs of Fridley residenfs. • Create sustainab/e, self-reliant, mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhoods that contribute positively to the quality of life and image of Fridley. • Ensure a variety of housing types for people in all stages of fhe life cycle. • Strengthen neighborhoods and improve upon the quality of the City's housing stock. • Diversify the housing supply fo include move up housing both in the form of rental and owner occupied housing. As Fridley's residents continue to age, demand will increase for "empty nester" and senior housing. There will be an increased demand for senior rental, senior owned condominium/town homes, and assisted living facilities. The proposed project, 71 senior owner-occupied condominium units, will meet some of the current demand for those seniors seeking alternatives to their current housing type. Rezoning these properties helps to achieve the Comprehensive Plan's goal for this area. Plat Request #04-01 John DeMello, Profitmax Inc., is seeking to replat the properties located at 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue and 1357 64th Avenue to create two separate lots. One of the newly created lots will accommodate the retail complex and the other lot will be used to allow for the construction of a 71-unit owner occupied senior condominium development. The proposed replat will consist of two lots; Lot #1 and Lot #2, Block 1, Spring Valley Estates. Rezoning a property to S-2, Redevelopment District allows for the maximum flexibility for a redevelopment project; however, City staff asked the petitioner to design their project to try to meet the zoning classification codes most similar to their intended use. The proposed Lot #1 will accommodate the 13,420 square foot retail complex. Retail complexes like the one proposed are typically zoned C-2, General Business. Proposed Lot #1 is 62,690 square feet in size, which exceeds the minimum lot area requirement for the C-2, General Business District. Proposed Lot #1 also meets all the parking requirements for the number of parking stalls required for a retail use. 4 " . �� ,.,,+�vS;e ��` �, �-t �f, �p�7''*' _: ,� -_ ,+�- " t `'� ��. ti:��.�: The proposed Lot #2 is approximately 116,658 square feet (2.68 acres) in size. The petitioner is proposing to construct 71 senior owner occupied condominium units. The development will include 73 underground parking stalls and 30 surface parking stalls. Because of the underground parking and the high water table in this area, the height of the building will be 45 feet at the midspan. Early discussions with Anoka County indicated that additional right-of-way on Central Avenue and Mississippi Street will be required for future reconstruction purposes. They anticipate that a 120 ft. right-of-way corridor will be required for both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersections in order to provide the necessa,ry turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. The County assumes when the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection is reconstructed, it would be centered in the 120 ft. right-of-way corridor. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and 10 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. Therefore, staff assumes that the County will be requesting that at this time, both of the right-of-ways be dedicated. The petitioner has drawn the site plan to illustrate right-of- way acquisition along both County Roads. Due to necessity of right-of-way acquisition, the parking setback for the retail space will be 2 feet from the north and west property lines. The parking setback on the senior condominium complex will also be 2 feet from the west property line. As stated above, due to the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setbacks can be recognized under this rezoning master plan approval. HOUSING STUDY The petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc., to complete a Markef Feasibility Sfudy for Senior Housing in Fridley. The demographic and competitive market analysis done by Maxfield indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 189 for-sale housing units. Maxfield's research pointed out that given the competitive situation in the marketplace, the quality of the subject site, and the lack of for-sale product within three _- miles of the property, the senior condominium project would be the most marketable - product for the site. Their research also showed that the subject site could best support �� an age-restricted owner-occupied development such as a condominium or cooperative of around 70 units. TRAFFIC Staff utilized a number of sources to determine the possible impacts that 71 senior owner occupied condominium units and the commercial complex may have on the local traffic patterns. Staff consulted the Transportation chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and reviewed the traffic study supplied by TDI, Traffic Date Incorporated. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER The City's Comprehensive Plan indicated that in 2001, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed senior condominiums carried 8,000 vehicles per day and, at this traffic level, was only carrying 57% of the traffic for which the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates Old Central carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2020, based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles / day, Old Central will be carrying 71 % if the maximum amount of traffic for which the roadway was designed. REVIEW OF TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT PREPARED BY TDI, INC. Profitmax Inc., hired TDI, Traffic Data Incorporated, a Data Collection, Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning firm to perform a traffic analysis. The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published in the ITE Trip Generafion Manual, 7th Edition, which was published in December 2003. The consultants used the SeniorAdu/t Housing Atfached category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed senior complex would generate a total of 247 trips per day. The consultants used the Specialty Retail Center category from the ITE manual and determined that the proposed retail complex would generate a total of 598 trips per day. Trip Generation ITE Land Use 252 814 Description Senior Adult Housing — Attached (71 units) Specialty Retail Center — (13,500 sq. ft.) Daily I AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips 247 598 In Out In Out 3 3 5 3 n/a n/a 16 21 TDI developed traffic forecasts for the following 2005 scenarios: ➢ No Build (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Elderly Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) . � Build Spring Valley Estates (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Elderly Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) The finding of these forecasts show that the level of service at both the Central Avenue/64�' Avenue intersections and the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue � 170 - intersections would remain the same in the no-build or build scenarios. The only change seen is during the AM Peak Hour at the Central Avenue/64�' Avenue eastbound intersection, where the level of service would change from LOS B to LOS C. Central Avenue/64T" Avenue Westbound & Eastbound A roach LOS Results AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Westbound Eastbound Westbound Eastbound 2005 No-Build A B C C 2005 Build A C C C Mississi i Street/Central Avenue Intersection LOS Results Scenario AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour 2005 No-Build C D 2005 Build C D To complete the traffic study, the consultants also referred to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which governs the use of traffic control devices per Minnesota State Statute. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has eight criteria (called warrants) to consider when determining if a traffic signal should be installed at an intersection or not. These warrants are primarily based on the traffic volumes flowing through the intersection. A warrant analysis was conducted for the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. To complete this analysis, TDI staff performed a turning movement count from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. None of the eight warrants are met under the existing conditions, nor will they be met if the elderly housing and retail buildings are constructed on the proposed site. According to this analysis, a traffic signal should not be installed at the intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue until at least one of the warrants is being met. The conclusions of TDI's analysis state that the stop controlled approaches at the Central Avenue/64th Avenue intersection operate at LOS C or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic control. The intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue will operate at LOS D or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic controls. A traffic signal is not currently warranted at the intersection and a traffic signal will not be warranted at the intersection after the proposed development is completed. A complete copy of the traffic study is available upon request. WETLAND The petitioner has been working with the Rice Creek Watershed to determine in the project area has a wetland. The petitioner has hired Tom Bremen, with Acorn Consulting, to delineate the site for any possible wetlands. Currently, both the petitioner and the Rice Creek Watershed are waiting for the delineators report. PHASING PLAN -_ ' The petitioner has indicated to staff that their intentions are to building the entire 71 unit senior owner-occupied condominium project all in one construction phase. If the bank _ required unit pre-sales are slower than predicated by the market report, then they plan _ 7 171 = : i to phase the project. Phasing the project would involve constructing the senior complex in 2 phases (2 buildings). The first phase would be 35 units and the second phase would be the remaining 36 units. Phase one would commence upon selling the bank required percentage of units in the first half of the building, removal of the existing homes and soil c4rrections. Phase one would tentatively commence in August 2004. Phase two would commence when the pre-sales are met for the first part of the 2"d half of the building. In the meantime, sod, landscaping, and parking would be installed. Phase 3 involves the retail space. Simultaneously, with the residential property, the retail building would be pre-leased. When the building is completely leased, the building will be constructed. Please see the attached phasing plan in your packet. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT PROCESS During the public hearings for the senior condominiums for Town Center Development, City staff heard many comments from neighboring property owners. Some of the concerns raised were regarding traffic and a guarantee that the tenants of the complex would be 55 or older. To alleviate those concerns ahead of time, the petitioner has provided city staff with a traffic study and a copy of the proposed association documents upon submittal of the rezoning and plat request. Staff also heard a concern regarding a drainage issue on properties south of 64tn Avenue. Reviewing histor�r showed that improvements have been made to the storm sewer system north of 64`h Avenue and that all the storm water from the north is diverted west to the much larger storm sewer system in Central Avenue. There is no connection between the storm sewer system north and the problem identified from the resident south of 64th Avenue. STAFF RECOMMEDATION City Staff recommends approval of this Rezoning ZOA #04-01 and accompanying site plan for fhe senior building and retail complex, with stipulations. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provides housing opportunities for seniors. • Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. • Provides additional job opportunities in Fridley City Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for PS#04-01, with stipu/ations. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of all land use requests above. 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A- 5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. _- 0 172 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64th Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run- off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13. A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 173 �7 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS The Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Appendix D of the Fridley City Code is amended hereinafter as indicated, and is hereby subject to the stipulations as shown in Attachment 1. SECTION 2. The tract or area within the County of Anoka and the City of Fridley and described as: 1340 Mississippi Street, 1314 Mississippi Street, 6461 Central Avenue (vacant), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), and 6421 Central Avenue. Lots15-19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition, subject to easement of record. 6401 Central Avenue: Lot 20, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition, except East 184 feet thereof, subject to easement of record. 1341 64th Avenue: The West 75 feet of the East 184 feet of Lot 20, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition, subject to easement of record. 1357 64th Avenue: The West 75 feet of the East 109 feet of Lot 20, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition, subject to easement of record. Is hereby designated to be in the Zoned District S-2 (Redevelopment District). SE CTION 3. That the Zoning Administrator is directed to change the official zoning map to show said tract or area to be rezoned from Zoned District C-1 (Local Business), C-2 (General Business), and R-1 (Single Family) to S-2 (Redevelopment District). PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS -- -- DAY OF MARCH, 2004. 174 _ -_ i i_ . I =- � �- ATTEST: DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK Public Hearing: March 8, 2004 First Reading: March 8, 2004 Second Reading: Publication: 175 SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR ATTACHMENT 1 Stipulations for Rezoning Request ZOA #04-01, John DeMello, Profitmax, Inc.: : -_ i 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A-5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A- 9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64th Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run-off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13.A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. _ 176 __ 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. 177 P � � r AGENDA ITEM � CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 CfTY OF FRIDLEY Date: March 3, 2004 a �Y To: William Burns, City Manager � From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Paul Bolin, Planning Coordinator Stacy Stromberg, Planner Subject: Preliminary Plat Request, PS #04-01, John DeMello, Profitmax Inc. M-04-32 INTRODUCTION John DeMello of Profitmax, Inc., is requesting a plat to create finro new parcels from 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant), 1341 64'n Avenue and 1357 64th Avenue. A 13,420 square foot retail complex will occupy the northern parcel and the southern parcel will be used for the construction of 71 senior condominiums. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the February 18, 2004, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for PS #04-01. After receiving public comment and a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of plat request, PS #04-01, with the 22 stipulations as presented. THE MOTION CARRIED ON A 6 TO 1 VOTE. Since the February 18, 2004, the petitioner has submitted a new site plan. The new site plans shows the walking path allow the east side of the property connecting to the walking path along Mississippi Street. It also shows a new parking layout for the commercial complex, which meets the parking requirements and also provides an area for proof of parking, if more parking is ever needed. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMNEDATION City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of the preliminary plat request. ' 178 _ 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A- 5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. 6. Buildings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64th Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run- off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Permit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13.A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to � , final plat approval. 179 City of Fridley Land Use Application ZOA #04-01 & PS #04-01 February 18, 2004 GENERAL INFORMATION SPECIAL INFORMATION Appiicant: Profitmax Inc. John DeMello 2872 17ih Terrace NW New Brighton MN 55112 Requested Action: Rezone property from C-1, C-2, and R-1 to S-2. Replat Location: 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue, 1341 64�' Avenue, 1357 64�' Avenue Existing Zoning: 1314 Mississippi St. — C-2, General Business 1340 Mississippi St. — R-1, Single Family 6401 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business 6421 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business & R-1, Single Family 6441 Central Avenue — C-1, Local Business & R-1 Single Family 6461 Central Avenue — C-2, General Business 1341 64'h Avenue — R-1, Single Family 1357 64�' Avenue — R-1, Single Family Size: Approximate size of entire area to be rezoned and replatted: 179,348 sq. ft. 4.1 acres Existing Land Use: Single Family homes, small commercial building (garage), and vacant land Surrounding Land Use & Zoning: N: Commercial building & C-2 E: Single Family & R-1 S: Single Family homes 8� C-1 and R-1 W: Vacant land and Restaurant & S-2 Comprehensive Plan Conformance: Future Land Use Map designates this area as Redevelopment. Zoning History: 1314 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1952 — House is built. 1959 — Detached garage built. 1340 Mississippi Street: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage constructed pre-1949. 6401 Central Avenue: :1 1941 — Lot is platted. House constructed prior to 1949. 1951 — Garage built. 1959 — Addition to house. 1975 — Detached garage built. 6421 Central Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. House and garage built prior to 1949. 6441 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot. 1941 — Lot is platted. 1969 — Proposal to build a Tastee-Freez. 1998 — Rezoning request from C-1 to R-1, withdrawn prior to Planning Commission. 6461 Central Avenue: Vacant Lot 1941 — Lot is platted. 1341 64�h Avenue: 1941 — Lot is platted. 1974 — House and garage are built. 1985 — SUP issued, second accessory is built. 1994 — Deck is built. 1357 64`� Avenue: 1974 — House and garage are built. 1985 - Deck is built. 1988 — Side yard setback variance granted, garage addition built. Legal Description of Property: 1314 Mississippi Street: Lot 16, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1340 Mississippi Street: Lot 15, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6401 Central Avenue: Lot 20, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6421 Central Avenue: Lot 19, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6441 Central Avenue: Lot 18, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 6461 Central Avenue: Lot 17, Block 1, Spring Valley Addition 1341 64�' Avenue: The W 75 ft of E 184 ft of lot 20 Blk 1, Spring Valley, subj to ease of rec 1357 64th Avenue: The W 75 ft of E 109 ft of Lot 20 Blk 1, Spring Valley, subj to ease of rec Council Action / 60 Day Date: City Council — March 8, 2004 60-Day Date — March 15, 2004 �� ": 2 SUMMARY OF REQUEST The petitioner, John DeMello, of Profitmax Inc., is requesting to replat and rezone the properties located at 1314 Mississippi St., 1340 Mississippi St., 6401 Central Ave., 6421 Central Ave., 6441 Central Ave., 6461 Central Ave., 1341 64th Ave., and 1357 64�' Ave., from C-1, Local Business, C-2 General Business, and R-1 Single Family to S-2 Redevelopment District for the purpose of redevelopment, to allow for a Senior Housing Development and a Retail Complex. SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS Cify Siaff recommends approval of this plat, rezoning and subsequent master plan requesf. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. • Provides housing opportunities for Fridley seniors. • Provides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. ■ Provides additional job opportunities. Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg � 181 Rezoning and Plat ZOA#04-01 & PS#04-01 OVERVIEW The requesfs: John DeMelio of Profitmax, Inc., is requesting two separate land use actions from the City of Fridley in order to construct 71 senior owner-occupied condominium units and a retail complex on the southwest corner of Central Avenue and Mississippi Street. The two actions being requested are a Plat and a Rezoning, all; with the master plan approval will be examined individually in this report. A Plat is being requested to create finro new parcels, from 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue (vacant), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant), 1341 64th Avenue and 1357 64th Avenue. A 13,420 retail complex will occupy the northern parcel and the southern parcel will be used for the construction of the 71 senior condominiums. The petitioner is also requesting a rezoning for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64th Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. Proposed Project: John DeMello, Profitmax Inc., is proposing to construct a 13,420 square foot retail complex on the north portion of the development. The petitioner has stated that he envisions that this complex will house neighborhood retail businesses, which may include a pharmacy, a coffee shop, an ice cream/sandwich shop and a hair salon. The retail complex will include at least 54, 10 foot wide parking stalls for customers. The petitioner is proposing a 4-story 71-unit independent senior condominium complex for the southern portion of the development. The proposed 71 units will be owner-occupied and comprised of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units. There will be four 1-bedroom units that will be 845 square feet in size and eight 1-bedroom units with a den, 1,020 square feet in size. There are fifty-six 2 bedroom and 2-bedroom plus den units planned that will vary 182 : _ � - in square footage from 1,157-1,515 in size. There will be three 3-bedroom units that will be 1,610 square feet in size. The development will include 73 underground parking stalls and 30 surFace parking stalls. The petitioner plans to model the exterior of both projects after an Italian villa. The site will include several ponds, a gazebo, and a trail system with landscaping that surrounds the property. SITE HISTORY The proposed development area is located on the southeast corner of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue. The area consists of 2 vacant lots, which are located on Central Avenue and 4 homes that were constructed prior to 1952, 2 of which are located on Mississippi Street and the other 2 are located on Central Avenue. The 2 existing homes on 64th Avenue were constructed in 1974. The petitioners' father, Frank DeMello purchased the vacant parcel located 6461 Central Avenue, 25 years ago. When the property at 1314 Mississippi Street came up for sale over the summer of 2003, the petitioner purchased it with the hope of developing the land. The petitioner then contacted surrounding property owners to see if they would be interested in selling their properties. When the neighboring property owners became interested in selling their properties, the petitioner came forward with this redevelopment project. ANALYSIS Rezoning Request ZOA #04-09 The petitioner is requesting a rezoning and master �lan approval for the east side of Central Avenue between Mississippi Street and 64t Avenue. Currently, there is a mixture of commercial and residential zonings and the petitioner is seeking to rezone the entire block to S-2 Redevelopment District. The properties requesting to be rezoned are 1314 Mississippi Street (single family home and garage (welding shop), zoned C-2, General Business), 1340 Mississippi Street (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family), 6401 Central Avenue (single family home, zoned C-1, Local Business), 6421 Central Avenue (single family home, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family), 6441 Central Avenue (vacant lot, split zoning, zoned C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family), 6461 Central Avenue (vacant lot, zoned C-2, General Business), 1341 64�' Avenue (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family), and 1347 64'h Avenue (single family home, zoned R-1, Single Family). The petitioner is proposing to redevelop this entire area. , ��..�...�,...�.._...�....�...,_....�.�,� t 13i�_._ i �._. � j A I � : y Q l ; �� ; �I t j �1 ;�� 6421 �I I � �l � • � J I, � -;� �� j . � � �� ._ � � N 183 2 Zoning Map — Shows mix of zoning and properties to be replatted and rezoned. As the properties exist today, 2 of them have split zoning between C-1, Local Business and R-1, Single Family. While both of the lots are rather large in size, conflicts arise when the zoning is split between a commercial and residential zoning. Rezoning a property to S-2 Redevelopment District, requires that the accompanying site plan become the master plan for the site. If the rezoning and master plan were approved by the City Council any modification of the site plan would need to go back to the City Council for review and approval. Review of the master plan would also need to be completed by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority as the property is in a Redevelopment District. The City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. State Statute gives the City the authority to "rezone" property from one designated use to another, so long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was developed with resident input taken from several meetings held between 1998 and 2000 and is a"tool intended to help guide future growth and development of the community...lt is a plan because it contains goals, policies and strategies fhat all work together, looking to the future and working towards achieving a community wide vision". In order for a rezoning to be viewed favorably, it must be in line with the City's vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed retail complex, senior owner-occupied condominium complex and rezoning of the properties meet several of the objectives the residents of Fridley identified in the visioning sessions for the Comprehensive Plan. The area of Old Central between Mississippi Street and Rice Creek Road was identified as an area for future redevelopment. The purpose of redevelopment is to provide the opporfunity for more e�cient land uses and eliminate ine�cient land uses and under ufilized parcels. Redevelopment can also provide an opportunity to build new facilities, meet current market demands and desires of the City, creates new tax base, and creafes additional job opportunities. All the above purposes of redevelopment have the potential of being met with the rezoning of these properties. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states that for this portion of Old Central, "consideration should be made to rep/acing the current mix of single-family residential and commercial uses with higher density residential development that together with the health club may serve as an aftractive residential location for move-up housing". The Comprehensive Plan also states that for projects in these redevelopment areas requiring rezoning that the S-2 zoning designation "would be the appropriate Zoning district to implement for the redevelopment project. The intent of the district is fo provide the City with site plan review authority to determine if the proposed project meets the goals and objectives Of fhe City's Comprehensive and Redevelopment Plans". _ 3 184 � _� � The Comprehensive Plan, in both the Future Land Use & the Housing chapters, addresses the desire for a variety of housing types in a number of goals listed below. • Ensure that adequate opportunities exist for the development of a variety of housing types at a range of affordability levels including low, low-moderate and high cost housing to meet the life-cycle needs of Fridley residents. • Create sustainable, self-reliant, mixed-use and mixed-income neighborhoods that contribute posifively to the quality of life and image of Fridley. • Ensure a variety of housing types for people in all stages of the life cycle. • Strengthen neighborhoods and improve upon the quality of the City's housing stock. • Diversify the housing supply to include move up housing bofh in the form of rental and owner occupied housing. As Fridley's residents continue to age, demand will increase for "empty nester" and senior housing. There will be an increased demand for senior rental, senior owned condominium/town homes, and assisted living facilities. The proposed project, 71 senior owner-occupied condominium units, will meet some of the current demand for those seniors seeking alternatives to their current housing type. Rezoning these properties helps to achieve the Comprehensive Plan's goal for this area. Plat Request #04-01 John DeMello, Profitmax Inc., is seeking to replat the properties located at 1314 Mississippi Street, 1340 Mississippi Street, 6401 Central Avenue, 6421 Central Avenue, 6441 Central Avenue, 6461 Central Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue and 1357 64th Avenue to create two separate lots. One of the newly created lots will accommodate the retail complex and the other lot will be used to allow for the construction of a 71-unit owner occupied senior condominium development. The proposed replat will consist of finro lots; Lot #1 and Lot #2, Block 1, Spring Valley Estates. Rezoning a property to S-2, Redevelopment District allows for the maximum flexibi�ity for a redevelopment project; however, City staff asked the petitioner to design their project to try to meet the zoning classification codes most similar to their intended use. The proposed Lot #1 will accommodate the 13,420 square foot retail complex. Retail complexes like the one proposed are typically zoned C-2, General Business. Proposed Lot #1 is 62,690 square feet in size, which exceeds the minimum lot area requirement for the C-2, General Business District. Proposed Lot #1 also meets all the parking requirements for the number of parking stalls required for a retail use. 185 4 4' � ' ' � , The proposed Lot #2 is approximately 116,658 square feet (2.68 acres) in size. The petitioner is proposing to construct 71 senior owner occupied condominium units. The development will include 73 underground parking stalls and 30 surface parking stalls. Because of the underground parking and the high water table in this area, the height of the building will be 45 feet at the midspan. Early discussions with Anoka County indicated that additional right-of-way on Central Avenue and Mississippi Street will be required for future reconstruction purposes. They anticipate that a 120 ft. right-of-way corridor will be required for both Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersections in order to provide the necessary turn lanes for future safety and operational purposes. The County assumes when the Central Avenue/Mississippi Street intersection is reconstructed, it would be centered in the 120 ft. right-of-way corridor. Consequently, roadway right-of-way dedication needs for this site are 27-30 ft. adjacent to Mississippi Street and 10 ft. adjacent to Central Avenue. Therefore, staff assumes that the County will be requesting that at this time, both of the right-of-ways be dedicated. The petitioner has drawn the site plan to illustrate right-of- way acquisition along both County Roads. Due to necessity of right-of-way acquisition, the parking setback for the retail space will be 2 feet from the north and west property lines. The parking setback on the senior condominium complex will also be 2 feet from the west property line. As stated above, due to the flexibility allowed in the S-2, Redevelopment district, the diminished setbacks can be recognized under this rezoning master plan approval. HOUSING STUDY The petitioner hired Maxfield Research Inc., to complete a Market Feasibilify Study for Senior Housing in Fridley. The demographic and competitive market analysis done by Maxfield indicates that there is a demand in the Fridley area for 189 for-sale housing units. Maxfield's research pointed out that given the competitive situation in the marketplace, the quality of the subject site, and the lack of for-sale product within three miles of the property, the senior condominium project would be the most marketable -_ product for the site. Their research also showed that the subject site could best support ` 5 :. �- an age-restricted owner-occupied development such as a condominium or cooperative of around 70 units. TRAFFIC Staff utilized a number of sources to determine the possible impacts that 71 senior owner occupied condominium units and the commercial complex may have on the local traffic patterns. Staff consulted the Transportation chapter of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and reviewed the traffic study supplied by TDI, Traffic Date Incorporated. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER The City's Comprehensive Plan indicated that in 2001, the portion of Old Central adjacent to the proposed senior condominiums carried 8,000 vehicles per day and, at this traffic level, was only carrying 57% of the traffic for which the roadway was designed and constructed to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The Comprehensive Plan anticipates Old Central carrying over 10,000 vehicles per day by the year 2020, based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 10,000 vehicles / day, Old Central will be carrying 71 % if the maximum amount of traffic for which the roadway was designed. REVIEW OF TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORT PREPARED BY TDI, INC. Profitmax Inc., hired TDI, Traffic Data Incorporated, a Data Coflection, Traffic Engineering and Transportation Planning firm to perform a traffic analysis. The consultants performed a trip generation analysis based on the methods and rates published in the 1TE Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, which was published in December 2003. The consultants used the SeniorAdulf Housing Attached category in the ITE manual to determine that the proposed senior complex would generate a total of 247 trips per day. The consultants used the Specialty Retai! Center category from the ITE manual and determined that the proposed retail complex would generate a total of 598 trips per day. Trin Generation ITE Land Use 252 814 Description Senior Adult Housing — Attached (71 units) Specialty Retail Center — (13.500 sa. ft.) Daily I AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Trips In 247 3 598 n/a Out In 3 5 n/a 16 Out 3 21 TDI developed traffic forecasts for the following 2005 scenarios: ➢ No Build (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Elderly Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) � Build Spring Valley Estates (with traffic forecasted from the Town Center Elderly Housing project approved across from the site on Central Avenue) The finding of these forecasts show that the level of service at both the Central Avenue/64`h Avenue intersections and the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue 187 � intersections would remain the same in the no-build or build scenarios. The only change seen is during the AM Peak Hour at the Central Avenue/64th Avenue eastbound intersection, where the level of service would change from LOS B to LOS C. Central Avenue/64T" Avenue Westbound & Eastbound A roach LOS Results AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Scenario Westbound Eastbound Westbound Eastbound 2005 No-Build A B C C 2005 Build A C C C Mississi i StreetlCentral Avenue Intersection LOS Results Scenario AM Peak Hour 2005 No-Build C 2005 Build C PM Peak Hour D D To complete the traffic study, the consultants also referred to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which governs the use of traffic control devices per Minnesota State Statute. The Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices has eight criteria (called warrants) to consider when determining if a traffic signal should be installed at an intersection or not. These warrants are primarily based on the traffic volumes flowing through the intersection. A warrant analysis was conducted for the Mississippi StreeUCentral Avenue intersection. To complete this analysis, TDI staff performed a turning movement count from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Mississippi Street/Central Avenue intersection. None of the eight warrants are met under the existing conditions, nor will they be met if the elderly housing and retail buildings are constructed on the proposed site. According to this analysis, a traffic signal should not be installed at the intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue until at least one of the warrants is being met. The conclusions of TDI's analysis state that the stop controlled approaches at the Central Avenue/64'h Avenue intersection operate at LOS C or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic control. The intersection of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue will operate at LOS D or better under all scenarios with the existing lane configurations and traffic controls. A traffic signal is not currently warranted at the intersection and a traffic signal will not be warranted at the intersection after the proposed development is completed. A complete copy of the traffic study is available upon request. WETLAND The petitioner has been working with the Rice Creek Watershed to determine in the project area has a wetland. The petitioner has hired Tom Bremen, with Acorn Consulting, to delineate the site for any possible wetlands. Currently, both the petitioner and the Rice Creek Watershed are waiting for the delineators report. PHASING PLAN The petitioner has indicated to staff that their intentions are to building the entire 71 unit senior owner-occupied condominium project all in one construction phase. If the bank required unit pre-sales are slower than predicated by the market report, then they plan 7 �I;�, � _� to phase the project. Phasing the project would involve constructing the senior complex in 2 phases (2 buildings). The first phase would be 35 units and the second phase would be the remaining 36 units. Phase one would commence upon selling the bank required percentage of units in the first half of the building, removal of the existing homes and soil corrections. Phase one would tentatively commence in August 2004. Phase two would commence when the pre-sales are met for the first part of the 2"d half of the building. In the meantime, sod, landscaping, and parking would be installed. Phase 3 invol�es the retail space. Simultaneously, with the residential property, the retail building would be pre-leased. When the building is completely leased, the building will be constructed. Please see the attached phasing plan in your packet. COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE TOWN CENTER DEVELOPMENT PROCESS During the public hearings for the senior condominiums for Town Center Development, City staff heard many comments from neighboring property owners. Some of the concerns raised were regarding traffic and a guarantee that the tenants of the complex would be 55 or older. To alleviate those concerns ahead of time, the petitioner has provided city staff with a traffic study and a copy of the proposed association documents upon submittal of the rezoning and plat request. Staff also heard a concern regarding a drainage issue on properties south of 64tn Avenue. Reviewing history showed that improvements have been made to the storm sewer system north of 64th Avenue and that all the storm water from the north is diverted west to the much larger storm sewer system in Central Avenue. There is no connection between the storm sewer system north and the problem identified from the resident south of 64th Avenue. STAFF RECOMMEDATION City Staff recommends approval of this Rezoning ZOA #04-01 and accompanying site p/an for the senior building and retail complex, with stipulations. • Proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. � Provides housing opportunities for seniors. � Pravides additional retail opportunities in Fridley. • Provides additional job opportunities in Fridley City Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat for PS#04-01, with stipulations. STIPULATIONS Staff recommends the following stipulations be attached to the approval of all land use requests above. 1. Property to be developed in accordance with master plan to be submitted prior to the City Council meeting of March 8, 2004. 2. Building elevations shall be constructed in accordance with architectural plan A- 5, titled Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04 and architectural plan A-9, titled Retail Floor Plan and Exterior Elevations, dated 2/6/04. 3. Petitioner to obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 4. Petitioner to meet the attached comments from the Fire Marshall. _� 5. Petitioner to meet all building and ADA requirements. :• : �. 6. Buiidings at 1314 Mississippi Street, 6421 Central Avenue, 6401 Centrai Avenue, 1341 64th Avenue, and 1357 64th Avenue to be removed prior to issuance of condominium building permits. 7. Petitioner to provide Certificate of Exemption for wetland or mitigate the wetland to meet the Rice Creek Watershed Districts regulations prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. No business signs shall be located within the County right-of-way. Any planting within the right-of-way to be approved by the County prior to planting. 9. Petitioner to obtain a permit from Anoka County for any work done within the county right-of-way. 10. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for stormwater run- off and management. 11. Storm pond maintenance agreement for both platted lots must be filed prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Petitioner shall obtain any required NPDES Fermit and provide NURP ponding for entire site. 13.A perpetual cross-pond agreement to be submitted prior to issuance of building permits to assure continued pond access. 14. City Engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building permit. 16. Petitioner to pay required Park Dedication Fee of $4,486.06. (195,046.02 square feet of land times .023 per square feet) 17. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the buildings' association documents prior to issuance of a building permit. 18. Building to be restricted to seniors and policies to do such shall be outlined in association documents and filed with the County with final plat. 19. Provide proof that any existing wells or individual sewage treatment systems located on the site are properly capped or removed. 20. Property owner of record at time of building permit application, to pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. 21. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County. 22. A Development Agreement outlining the Developer's obligation to install utilities, etc., will be prepared by the City and shall be signed by the Petitioner prior to final plat approval. � 190 ��_Y !Si , . � AGENDA ITEM ��F CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2004 FRIdLEY INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS 191