RES 2004-30 - 00002273RESOLUTION 2004 -30
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY DENYING THE APPLICATION OF JOHN
DEMELLO, PROFITMAX INC., BY OR ON BEHALF OF SPRING VALLEY ESTATES FOR
THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY TO S -2 AND REQUESTING THE
REPLATTING OF THAT SAME PROPERTY FOR THE CREATION OF A HIGH DENSITY
CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT.
WHEREAS, John Demello, Profitmax Inc. is the Fee and or Equitable Owner of certain real
estate (hereinafter "the Parcel ") located in the City of Fridley, Minnesota, located approximately
at or near the corner of Mississippi Street and Central Avenue in that City; and
WHEREAS, John Demello, Profitmax Inc., made an application to the City of Fridley for the
rezoning of the aforesaid real estate to S -2 for the purpose of developing on the site a
condominium complex; and
WHEREAS, as part of the application process, John Demello, Profitmax, Inc. (hereinafter, "the
Developer ") submitted a development plan to the City, a copy of which is incorporated herein by
reference; and
WHEREAS, the Developer, or its agents and representatives, spent many hours discussing the
elements of the plan with the City's staff, and
WHEREAS, in addition to requesting a rezoning of the parcel, and as part of its application
process, the Developer has requested a replatting of the Parcel; and
WHEREAS, on February 18, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Fridley conducted a
public hearing on the issue of both the rezoning and replatting of the Parcel
WHEREAS, on March 8, 2004, the City Council of the City of Fridley conducted a public
hearing on the question of the rezoning and replatting of the Parcel; and
WHEREAS, on March 29, 2004, the City Council of the City of Fridley reviewed the
developer's revised 90 -unit condominium building with commercial space integrated into that
residential building. A plan that the developer prepared in an effort to address concerns voiced
by the City Council members, the Anoka County Highway Department, as well as, members of
the public at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, at the public hearing conducted by the City Council on March 8, 2004, extensive
testimony was given both by and on behalf of the Developer, as well as members of the City
staff and numerous members of the public; and
Resolution No. 2004 -30
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fridley allowed additional testimony on March 29,
2004, since the elements of the development presented at the March 8, 2004 meeting had been
significantly modified: and
NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE FOREGOING, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE
CITY COUNCIL MAKES THE FOLLOWING:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The applications for the rezoning and replatting of the Parcel are complete and all
required public hearings on the matter have been concluded.
The modified Development plan provides for 90 -units of residential condominium
dwelling and 13,750 s.f of commercial retail space, which is 19 residential units more
and 330 s.f more than the previous development proposal
2. The proposal represents a very significant increase in population density in that location
over the density currently at that site.
The proposal, when added to the units already approved in an unrelated development
across the street, would significantly increase traffic rates in the neighborhood and would
change the character of the neighborhood from a mix of single family residential and
low- intensity commercial to high density residential.
4. Anoka County raised objections regarding traffic access to and from the site on county -
maintained roads and highways. While the Applicant has made meaningful efforts to
address the concerns raised, the City has received no written statement from the County
indicating that it has no further traffic - related objections to the proposed development on
the site.
Increases in traffic at the site and in the neighborhood would decrease the safety of
pedestrians and motorists in the immediate vicinity of the site.
6. The Development plan provides for setbacks of the parking areas proposed for the
property that are near the property lines of the Parcel and provide a diminished landscape
opportunity, as well as provide for a very limited opportunity for on -site snow storage.
7. The nearness of the building and likely snow storage areas to the roadways would likely
impede sight lines of motorists and pedestrians, resulting in an increased safety hazard to
those individuals.
8. The nearness of the building and likely snow storage areas to the roadways would have a
negative aesthetic impact to the neighborhood.
Resolution No. 2004 -30
Page 3
9. The height of the proposed structure on the Parcel in the Development plan, particularly
in the 4 — story portion of the Development, would significantly block sunlight to, and
impede the view of adjoining residential development more than what they currently
enjoy.
10. The development would adversely affect the quality of life and health of surrounding
residents by blocking direct access to sunlight during much of the daylight hours.
11. The screening and plantings proposed in the development would not be sufficient to
provide the modest degree of privacy currently enjoyed by adjacent land owners once the
Development were to occur.
BASED, THEREFORE, UPON THE FOREGOING, THE CITY FURTHER RESOLVES
THAT:
1. It concludes the modified development proposal represents a density and intensity
of use of such a degree as would adversely impact the character of the
neighborhood in which it would be located.
2. It concludes that the modified development proposal would adversely impact the
health and safety of the neighborhood surrounding, as well as the City residents
and members of the public that would be using the adjoining highways and roads.
The application of the Developer is, therefore, DENIED.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
12TH DAY OF APRIL 2004.
Scott J. Lund, Mayor
ATTEST:
"gAv4l)
Debra A. Skogen, Cit Jerk