Loading...
11/21/2005 - 00027044CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY NOVEMBER 21, 2005 The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:34 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-at-Large Barnette Councilmember Billings Councilmember Bolkcom Councilmember Wolfe OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager Fritz Knaak, City Attorney Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Jon Haukaas, Director of Public Works Brian Weierke, Police Captain Don Abbott, Director of Public Safety Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator CONGRESSIONAL UPDATE: U.S. Representative Martin O. Sabo provided a legislative update. He said there are two big issues remaining for this year: the Labor, Health, and Human Services Education appropriation bill and the Defense appropriation bill. The other appropriation bills have all been passed. One that may be of particular interest for Fridley is the transportation bill in which they have continued some funding for the Northstar Corridor project. The amount of $2 million was provided this year. There is some money that was appropriated in 2003 that is also available. Congressman Sabo stated there are other issues that may or may not be resolved in December. He felt there would always be the ongoing debate of our policy in Iraq. He is unsure there would be any particular votes on that matter. Councilmember Billings asked what committees he served on. Congressman Sabo said he served on the Appropriations Committee for 27 years. That is the committee that allocates money for all of the agencies that they provide money to on an annual basis. He served on the Budget Committee in 1993 and 1994. As part of the appropriations FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 2 Committee, he is a member of the Defense Subcommittee and is the ranking democrat on the Homeland Security Subcommittee. Mayor Lund asked how the United States was going to pay for the costs of the war and the natural disasters we have had. Congressman Sabo replied some of it gets built into our regular budget, like the Department of Homeland Security. Some costs increase the short-term debt of this country and causes significant taxes. William Burns, City Manager, commented that this was Congressman Sabo's second time serving the people of Fridley. Congressman Sabo stated it was nice to get back. Dr. Burns asked if he heard much from the people of Fridley. Congressman Sabo replied some on general questions. Patricia Freeburg, 5557 East Danube Road, said she read in the paper that the government is now is reneging on the amount of promised aid to Louisiana and Mississippi. She asked if that was true. Congressman Sabo said he had not read that story. There are so different ways aid is given. They have appropriated over $60 billion for disaster relief at this point. Only about $20 billion has been spent, so there is a significant amount of money still available for dealing with disaster relief. A lot of payments go directly to individuals. He encouraged people to call him with questions or problems. Dr. Burns stated the congressman has agreed to do a cable interview. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of November 7, 2005 APPROVED. OLD BUSINESS: 1. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 220 of the Fridley City Code, Residential Rental Property Maintenance and Licensing Code, as it Pertains to Reinspection Fees. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 3 Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated the amendment moves fees from Chapter 220 to Chapter 11. The amendment also provides for denial of a license at the time of renewal. Staff recommends Council's approval. WAIVED THE SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE AND ADOPTED ORDINANCE NO. 1213 UPON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLICATION. 2. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 104 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Diseased Tree Removal Assessment Fees. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. NEW BUSINESS: 3. Receive the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of November 2, 2005. RECEIVED. 4. Resolution Receiving the Feasibility Report and Calling for a Public Hearing on the Matter of Construction of Certain Improvements: Neighborhood Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2006 — 1. Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated this resolution accepts our consultant's feasibility report and establishes a public hearing for the project on December 12. An open house has been scheduled for Wednesday, November 30. Staff recommends Council's approval. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what area was covered by the street improvement project. Jon Haukaas, Director of Public Works, stated the 2006 street improvement project will be in the center part of the city. The area covered includes the neighborhood south of Community Park, north of Rice Creek, and then in the center part of the City, north and east of Hayes School, Madison Street, Pandora, Caniston, Overton, Jackson Street, also going south of Mississippi Street. The open house will be on Wednesday, November 30, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. The project will be explained in more detail at that time. Representatives from the Rice Creek Watershed District will also be present to talk about some of the storm water issued involved. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-67. 5. Resolution Abating a Portion of the Assessment for Certain Properties within the 2005 — 1 Street Improvement Project. THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 4 6. Resolution in Support of an Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise Permit for Fridley Lions Club (Joe DiMaggids) (Ward 2). Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated this application is for the renewal of the gambling premise permit for Joe DiMaggio's from March 1, 2006, to February 28, 2008. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-69. 7. Resolution Authorizing an Increase in Compensation and Changes in Certain Benefits for the 2006 Calendar Year. Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated this resolution provides for a 3 percent cost of living adjustment and an increase in applicable automobile allowance. The amount is consistent with increases approved for union employee groups as well as with increases in other cities. Staff recommends Council's approval. ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-70. 8. Claims (124058-124356). APPROVED. 9. Licenses. APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. 10. Estimates. APPROVED THE FOLLOWING ESTIMATES: Shank Construction, Inc. 3501 — 85th Avenue North Brooklyn Park, MN 55443 Commons Park Treatment Plant Upgrade Project No. 357 Estimate No. 1 ............................................ $ 46,654.00 BCG Construction, Inc. 3117 Salem Avenue South St. Louis Park, MN 55416 2005 Miscellaneous Concrete Repair Project No. 359 Estimate No. 5 ............................................. $ 4,734.94 FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 5 Dave Perkins Contracting, Inc. 14230 Basalt Street N.W. Ramsey, MN 55303 71 '/z Avenue Street Improvement Project No. ST. 2005 — 3 Estimate No. 1 ............................................. $ 51,157.50 Councilmember Bolkcom requested that Items 2 and 5 be removed and placed on the regular agenda. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the consent agenda as presented with the removal of Items 2 and 5. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the agenda with the addition of Items 2 and 5. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OPEN FORM (VISITORS): Donald E. Anderson, Jr., 7304 West Circle NE, asked why cars were always in the Cattle Company parking lot. He has seen people sleeping in their cars. Mr. Abbott, Public Safety Director, stated for the most part the property around the Cattle Company would be considered private property. He told Mr. Anderson if he saw someone sleeping in a car in the parking lot to call 911 and an officer would be called out to check to make sure the person is okay. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 11. Consideration of an Ordinance to Amend the City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by Making a Change in Zoning Districts (Rezoning Request, ZOA #05-04, by Peter Borman to Rezone Multiple Properties from R-3, Multi-Family, to R-1, Single Family, Generally Located at 100, 104, 108, 112, 116, 120, 124, 128 and 132 (River Edge Way) (Ward 3). MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 6 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:52 P.M. Julie Jones, Planning Coordinator, said the petitioner is Peter Borman who lives at 120 River Edge Way. The petitioner, on behalf of the owners of 100, 104, 108, 112, 116, 120, 124, 128, and 132 River Edge Way is requesting to rezone these properties from R-3, Multi-Family, to R- 1, Single Family. The petitioner has contacted all of the above property owners regarding the rezoning request and the City has received signatures from all of them. All of the properties requesting to be rezoned were developed as single-family homes between the years of 1957 through 1961. They are all zoned R-3, Multi-Family and have been since the City's first zoning map dating back to 1958. The 1958 zoning map shows an R-3, Multi-Family, zoning designation starting at the south edge of River Edge Way (61st Way) and e�tending all the way to Interstate 694. Sometime between 1958 and 1962, the school district purchased the land south of the subject properties, which resulted in a change of zoning from R-3, Multi-Family, to P, Public. As a result of the school property being rezoned to Public, a strip of R-3, Multi-Family land remains as a remnant of what was once a very large R-3 zoned property. The petitioner and his neighbors would like to see the current zoning changed to reflect the current land use, which is single family. Ms. Jones said that while single-family homes are a permitted use in the R-3 zoning district, changing the zoning to the land's current use will allow the single-family neighborhood to remain the same as it exists today. The law gives the City the authority to rezone property from one designated use to another, as long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan's current land use map and 2020 future land use map designates this area as "Single Family." Rezoning these properties from R-3, Multi-Family to R-1, Single Family is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will promote preservation and reinvestment of the existing single-family neighborhood. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item on November 2, 2005, and unanimously recommended approval. Staff recommends Council's approval. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if staff could have brought this before Council. Ms. Jones replied staff could have done that, but did not really see a problem. The petitioner chose to bring it forward. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if a fee was involved. Ms. Jones replied there is a fee involved. Since single-family is a permitted use in the R-3 zoning district, staff does not typically go out and change that zoning. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what the fee was. Mayor Lund said it was $1,500. Keith Olson, 112 River Edge Way, said at the Planning Commission meeting he asked if the City would be willing to waive the fee if there were any unusual circumstances. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 7 Mayor Lund replied that is something they could consider. Councilmember Bolkcom asked staff if they had ever waived any fees on anything similar to this. Scott Hickock, Community Development Director, said he cannot recall a situation where a group of residents have asked for a collective rezoning and they have waived the fees. It is something that he thinks should be put into the record that Council did take the approach at the time the Comprehensive Plan was adopted that there is an inconsistency and Council chose to take those on a case-by-case basis. There was not an urgent need to modify the rezoning unless there are petitioners. This is a bit different than the taxpayers just paying for staff time. There is a certain group who are getting a specific benefit to their property. Dr. Burns stated just to be clear on the record, he believed there times when they have waived the fee. Mr. Hickok stated Council has the ability to waive the fee at its discretion. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DELCARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:10 P.M. 12. Consideration of an Ordinance Creating Chapter 205.32, 0-7, of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Shoreland Overlay District. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette 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 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 8:12 P.M. Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, said this te�t amendment is for a Shoreland Overlay District in Fridley. Fridley needs to bring shoreline building requirements into conformity with the State mandate that was passed many years ago which was designed to protect public waters from overdevelopment. Even though Fridley is a fully-developed community, this is something we are still required to do. Ms. Jones stated in 1988, Fridley's staff began drafting a shoreland overlay ordinance in preparation for a 1991 DNR mandate. Debate over details of the ordinance continued through the early 90's. Staff requested flexibility from the State standard to only include first-tier properties. There was an issue about the DNR wanting us to include property within 1,000 feet of the first and second tier properties. Council was very concerned about creating many non- conforming properties by doing that, and the ordinance was shelved after some debate. Lack of a shoreline ordinance is a concern again, and staff has been warned that they need to adopt one FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 8 before we present the ne�t Comprehensive Plan update. Fridley shorelines are fully developed and it is in the best interests of the City to protect our waters. Many cities upstream from Fridley have not yet passed a shoreline ordinance. Staff has found that it is important for Fridley to have sound protections in place if we plan to go to our neighboring cities upstream, there are 28 of them in the Rice Creek Watershed District alone, and request them to implement similar code language to help protect Fridley public waters. Also in 2000, the City started the implementation phase of the Springbrook Watershed Clean Water Partnership grant project. This included a commitment to study ways that Fridley could protect surface water quality through ordinance changes and to share the findings with the other three cities involved in the project. Two of them do not have shoreline ordinances right now. Ms. Jones stated the current shoreland proposal was developed by staff after consulting with the DNR. The DNR suggested that we use New Hope's shoreland ordinance as a model. She said the Shoreland Overlay District would be overlaid over the other zoning districts that apply. The ones that are the most stringent are the ones that would be applicable. We have the Critical Overlay District in place now which affects property in the City from East River Road West to the Mississippi River. That overlay district contains a lot of the same language that is in the Shoreland Overlay District proposal. There is also the Creek and River Overlay District which pertains to language about building in the floodway. It gets a bit confusing for some people who own some of these properties because they are dealing with multiple regulations and different overlay districts in the code. The properties that will be affected by this overlay district include properties directly abutting shoreline or within a certain distance of it, or first-tier properties. Ms. Jones stated the overlay district includes 437 private parcels and some public parcels as well. The properties that have been included are properties around Moore Lake, Spring Lake, Locke Lake, Harris Pond, Farr Lake, the main wetland in Springbrook Nature Center, Mississippi River, Norton Creek, Oak Glen Creek, Rice Creek, Springbrook Creek, and Stoneybrook Creek A problem in the past was that this would make many properties non- conforming and people would not be able to rebuild on the property if there was a catastrophe and their structures were destroyed. The State statute was changed last year and it allows for the rebuilding of non-conforming properties. So even if this overlay district creates a non- conforming situation, they will be allowed to rebuild that property as long as they do not expand the footprint of that property. They will also be allowed to maintain that property, to do any sort of interior renovations that would not change the footprint of the structures. Staff is also in the process of updating our non-conforming section of the zoning code to match the change in the State statute. Ms. Jones stated there are three core components to the Shoreland Overlay District. One is lot coverage requirements for shoreland property. The second is setback requirements for structures on shoreland property. The third defines a variance process. As far as lot coverage on shoreline properties, this overlay district redefines what they consider lot coverage. The shoreline overlay includes the square footage of structures and any other impervious surface such as driveways, patio areas, swimming pools, and basketball courts. Ms. Jones stated the second main compliance is the setback This gets a little confusing because of the setback requirements from the ordinary high-water mark and setback requirements from FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 9 the bluff line, but the setback requirements for the ordinary high water marks are setback at 50 feet with the exception of 100 feet on the river and that is to coincide with the language that is already in place in the Critical Area Overlay District for the Mississippi River. The setback requirements from the bluff line, or whichever one is the furthest distance back, is the one that people would have to abide by. In some situations, they have both. The setback requirements for all water body types would be 40 feet from the bluff line. That creates what they call a bluff impact zone which is that area between the bluff and the 40 feet area back on the property and nothing would be allowed to be built in that bluff impact zone except for stairways and landings. For people who live near the river, this requirement is already in place with the existing Critical Overlay District. As far as the variance process, this is laid out in the draft ordinance in regards to the 35 percent lot coverage. There is also a clause near the end of the draft code for decks which allows people to add decks on their property without applying for a variance. Ms. Jones stated the Fridley Environmental Quality and Energy Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the draft Shoreland Ordinance. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 2 and unanimously passed a motion to present it to Council. Staff concurs with the Planning Commission's recommendations. The ne�t step in the process would be the first reading of the ordinance which will likely occur at the December 5 City Council meeting. The DNR has indicated that they will work very hard to provide feedback prior to that date. Councilmember Billings asked if there is already an overlay district along the Mississippi River that is 100 feet back and 40 feet from the bluff, what impact will this particular ordinance have on those properties. Ms. Jones said the only change in this zoning overlay for people living on the river is the 35 percent lot coverage requirement. Councilmember Billings said with the current State legislation, if something were to happen and they had to rebuild, they would be able to rebuild in the same location and at the same size. They just could not expand. Ms. Jones replied correct. Councilmember Billings asked what this would change for people who live by creeks and streams. Ms. Jones replied it is really putting a new set of requirements in place because the Creek and River Overlay District is designed basically to prohibit the building in a floodway or flood fringe area. Most of these properties that are in this proposed shoreline overlay district are also impacted a bit by part of their property being in the floodway or flood fringe. They cannot build at all in those areas. What staff would have to do is look at any application and determine which are the most restrictive requirements. Councilmember Billings said so this would impact quite a few properties along the creeks. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 10 Ms. Jones replied, yes. Councilmember Billings asked about the lakes. Ms. Jones said it may be new for Harris Pond and Farr Lake because she believes they do not have any area covered by any overlay district. With respect to Locke Lake and Moore Lake, most of those properties do have areas in the floodway or the flood fringe. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what would happen if Fridley does not approve this by 2008. Ms. Jones replied they have been told by the Metropolitan Council that the City must have a shoreline ordinance in place to get our ne�t Comprehensive Plan update approved, which would be in 2008. Councilmember Bolkcom asked what jointly applied meant. Ms. Jones stated if they have an application that had area in the back yard that was included in the floodway, you would have to look at those requirements that are in place in the Creek and River Overlay District that addresses building in the floodways. Staff would also have to analyze how the requirements for the shoreline overlay apply on top of the requirements that are in the base zoning district. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the letter Ms. Jones wrote to Tom Hovey from the DNR. She was concerned that they had not heard from him. She did not want to vote for this until she saw something in writing that they are agreeing to the 35 percent lot coverage. Ms. Jones said they had not heard from him. She said he is the sole person who reviews their draft overlay district, and he has been in approval of it in telephone conversations thus far. Councilmember Bolkcom said she would like to see it in writing. She asked whether at some point will there be definitions of a recreational lake, a general development lake and a natural environmental lake. Ms. Jones said it is her understanding that is defined in the State statutes. She did not think a definition needed to be included in the City's code. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about measures related to impervious surfaces. She asked if this was going against the City code related to hard surfaces. Ms. Jones replied this is all about protecting the waterway and the reason why they required paved surfaces in the City was because loose gravel and soil were washing into the streets and public waterways. The material carries a lot of harmful metals and chemicals with it. Councilmember Bolkcom stated in Section (E) it says "Construction sidewalks and driveways of partially pervious raised materials such as decking which has ...." She asked if staff could look at this. She asked staff to explain about the section on non-conformities. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 11 Ms. Jones said this language was taken from the New Hope code. She said this is a big concern with people who live on the waterways. They want to be able to replace their decks, for example. Staff believed they should keep the language in there. This allows people to add new decks or deck additions without a variance process. Councilmember Bolkcom said the section did not say anything about new. She said she was talking about the sentence before 3(a). She thought it could be clearer. Mayor Lund asked what the code says under Section 205.32.5.8. Ms. Jones stated that is the variance section of the Code. Mayor Lund said he agreed with Councilmember Bolkcom. He would like a definitive answer from the State. He would like to know what constitutes an acceptable variance. Ms. Jones said Section 205.32.8.0 is the procedures for a variance. It requires people to come up with a variance request and address a unique situation. This overlay district goes a little bit further and that is why it has the additional variance section. It sets forth some examples of what people might do to mitigate the impact of an added impervious surface. Councilmember Bolkcom said if you live on the creek or Locke Lake for example is there some possibility the DNR or the Rice Creek Watershed District could say we do not think you should have it more than 25 percent. Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, said typically the Rice Creek Watershed District does not look at lots smaller than about 2'/z acres. They could, but historically, they have not looked at the individual cases of a residential development to his knowledge. Councilmember Bolkcom said her neighbor is building some retaining walls and they had to sign off on it. Mr. Haukaas replied that is different than a building. That is an improvement directly on the shoreline which is within their jurisdiction and would require a permit. Councilmember Bolkcom stated what they are both saying is that as far as additions and buildings, unless it is right down along the water, along the shoreline, they are really not involved unless it is over 2'/z acres? Mr. Haukaas stated he has not been involved in anything of that nature, no. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it affected any public property or any of their street reconstruction projects or anything else. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 12 Mr. Haukaas said it would apply restrictions on how close we could develop to the lakes, creeks, streams or rivers. He does not believe it would affect any of the City's street projects at this point. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it would affect any lift stations. Mr. Haukaas replied, no. Councilmember Barnette asked who establishes the high water mark and the bluff line. Mr. Haukaas said the Rice Creek Watershed District has done studies on Rice Creek, and they set that. It is true that the bluff lines could change. Councilmember Barnette stated he sees a number of residents that are present at the meeting who live on Oak Glen Creek and Stoneybrook, which both have had major flooding problems and washouts. He asked how a line was established there. Mr. Haukaas replied regarding a bluff line, basically it is where the slope changes to a point where it exceeds 12 percent. That is something that can be measured. Over the years that has changed. Dirk Schindel, 6270 Riverview Terrace, asked what the benefit was for the City and the property owners. He asked what the City's role would be. He said in talking about adjusting setbacks and distances, why don't those agencies that demand it do it on their own rather than create another administrative district. Councilmember Billings replied that would be a very good question for the State legislature because this is not a decision that was made by City staff. It is mandated by the Minnesota State legislature and is being enforced by the Metropolitan Council. Mr. Schindel asked what benefit this will have to the City of Fridley and its citizens. Since the City is very near 100 percent developed, it is not going to have a lot of real benefit. It is something the State says the City has to do. Mr. Schindel said he would encourage Council to ask the State that question. He asked about the permit or variance application. Councilmember Billings replied he would still need to apply to the Rice Creek Watershed District and the DNR for any permits. All this ordinance means is when you apply for a building permit with the City, we would look to see where you are building and whether it falls within these requirements. Mr. Schindel asked if the City would inherit an enforcement burden. Councilmember Billings said we still need to look at all of the zoning ordinances before a building permit is issued. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 13 Patricia Freeburg, 5557 East Danube Road, stated she lives on Farr Pond. She asked what would happen to the path around the pond. Mr. Haukaas said the path around Farr Lake has been in terrible condition for some time. They had planned to remove the path this fall but could not because of the storm. They are looking at removing the asphalt in the spring and replacing it with a gravel path. Ms. Freeburg asked if it will be in compliance. Mr. Haukaas said it would. Ms. Freeburg said she did not think gravel would work It would wash into the pond and wash pollution into it. She thought something more needed to be done. Her other question is she discovered that her house was built on an unbuildable lot. If there is enough rain, there is water in her grass all the way up to the back of her house. She asked how the high water mark would be determined for her home. Mr. Haukaas said it is the ordinary high water mark, where the water normally is and that is defined in State statutes by the type of vegetation. If it is not an obvious delineation, then they look at the vegetation to see if there is aquatic or grass to determine where that delineation is. Councilmember Wolfe asked it they would be putting pipes under the gravel path. Mr. Haukaas said there are several sections where there is irregular flow across or under the path, and they would put small culverts where necessary. Mayor Lund asked if they could replace it with asphalt. Mr. Haukaas said they could. Mayor Lund stated but they could not add a new one if it was not already there. Ms. Jones replied this would be different because it is actually part of public land. Jerry Bahls, 7514 Alden Way, said he was a little confused by Section 8 of the ordinance. Ms. Jones suggested that he look at the critical area overlay language that already applies to him. It is her understanding that this language pretty much matches what we have in the existing overlay. Mr. Bahls said Section 8 talks about the provisions which are not applicable like removing dead and diseased trees and limbs and those that pose safety hazards. He would propose they add noxious weeds, particularly Buckthorn. Ms. Jones said they will look into that. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 14 Richard Harris, 6200 Riverview Terrace, said he is surprised in the proposed ordinance that it is 50 feet. He asked how this ordinance fit in with the wild and scenic river designation on the Mississippi that runs from Anoka to Hastings. Mr. Hickok, said they looked at the Natural Scenic Riverways regulations. Ms. Jones stated she was assuming that was all reviewed when they did the Critical Area Overlay and the setback requirements that they were talking about were all analyzed at that time. Mr. Harris stated that was the critical area that was done previous to the designation of wild and scenic rivers. Critical areas have been in place for about 20 years. He is surprised the numbers have to 50 feet and a 40-foot bluff line which was never mentioned along the lakes. That was always a minimum of 75 feet. He asked if there were new regulations. Mr. Hickok stated when the last version of the Comprehensive Plan was adopted, staff took a look at the wild and scenic designation and agreed to adopt the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area guidelines. They agreed to build them into the Comprehensive Plan. They have also been comparing those against regulations they had for setbacks. If there is any conflict, the stricter requirement would apply. Dr. Burns asked if the vegetation requirements in the Shoreland Overlay District are stricter than the 1VINRRA rules. Mr. Hickock said they match. Mr. Harris asked if he complied with the 40-foot bluff line and the 100-foot setback from the river, could he expand his dwelling towards the street. Ms. Jones replied a person could, provided they are meeting their front yard setback requirements. They would still have to meet the other setback requirements of the zoning districts. Mary Vasecka, 6909 Hickory Drive NE, asked if the affected property owners should have been invited to the Planning Commission meeting about this ordinance. She asked if feeding the wildlife was part of that ordinance. Ms. Jones stated the Planning Commission held other public hearings on various te�t amendments. Public hearings for those amendments will be held at the City Council meeting on December 12, 2005. Ms. Vasecka strongly recommended that nothing be passed until they have received everything in writing from the watershed district and the DNR and it is notarized. She also had a question about her specific property and what she would need to do if she wanted to remodel. Ms. Jones said she has to meet all of the setback requirements. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 15 Mayor Lund said the notice was published for the Planning Commission meeting, and individual notices went out for the Council meeting. Ms. Vasecka said it is her understanding that the other 28 communities in the Rice Creek Watershed District will need to have the same shoreline plan submitted to the Met Council by the 2008 deadline. Ms. Jones said that is what they have been told. Ross Meisner, 7836 Alden Way, asked if there was a shoreline overlay in place that had been approved by the DNR in this vicinity. Ms. Jones said New Hope has one, and there are probably more. Mr. Meisner asked where he could find information on how this affects the landscaping within the bluff line. Ms. Jones replied there is some information on the City's website. Leif Nelsen, 7190 Riverview Terrace, asked what the 35 percent encompasses. Ms. Jones said the calculation will be done strictly on the square footage of the lot. Mr. Nelsen said he is on the river. Looking at the lot plat, it is like 175 feet from the river up to the bluff, and it is a pretty steep bank, and then it goes back another 175 feet. He asked if the 35 percent coverage include the 175 feet from the river to the top of the bluff and then from the bluff to the street. Ms. Jones said it would include all of the property that he owns down to the river. Mr. Nelsen asked since he is exceeding that now, if he had some plans to do some renovations and redo the driveway, would that be grandfathered in. Ms. Jones replied he could resurface it without applying for a variance. If he is talking about adding onto his home and he is already at the 35 percent lot coverage, he would need to apply for a variance to exceed the 35 percent lot coverage. Mr. Nelsen asked if what he has is over 35 percent and he wants to put in a new driveway, would it be grandfathered in. Ms. Jones said he would be allowed to replace the driveway as it exists. If he wanted to expand, he would need to apply for a variance. Don Curtis, 361 Ely Street NE, said Springbrook runs through the back of his property. He was talking to his neighbor and he heard about property taxes going up in other communities that have the zoning. He asked if that was going to happen. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 16 Councilmember Billings stated this should have no impact on the value of his property. John Fink, 465 Rice Creek Terrace, said he is concerned about the bluff line. He is concerned about how it would affect his property and any renovations he wanted to do. Mayor Lund stated they understand it is going to affect a number of property owners. He can still build, rebuild, repair and renovate it in that same footprint. Mr. Fink stated from the way it is worded, it looks like all he can do is go up. Councilmember Bolkcom said staff should be able to work with him and help him define where his property is and what he can and cannot do. Tim Hoglund, 148 River Edge Way, stated he moved into an older home three years ago and he would like to make some changes at some point, but he is not sure what they are. He has a very long lot. It is 350 feet from the bluff line to the high water mark. He asked where the bluff line was for his property. Mayor Lund asked how close it is from the top of the bluff line to the back of his home. Mr. Hoglund said it is about 35 feet. He asked how he could find out if these changes would affect him. Councilmember Billings stated the only impact would be if he would qualify for doing any improvements based on whether he had more or less than the 35 percent lot coverage. Unless he has a tremendous amount of impervious surface, it is highly likely that this will have no additional impact. He will, however, be impacted by those ordinances already in place. Councilmember Bolkcom suggested that Mr. Hoglund talk to staff. Ms. Jones stated staff often does not have the ability to make that determination. They rely on the person coming in with the application to provide them with a survey that has topography measurements and elevations on it. Without that information, staff cannot make a determination of where the bluff line is. If Mr. Hoglund is planning on making improvements, the restrictions are already in place now. He will need to have a survey for staff to review. Mr. Harris stated one of the problems along the river has been uncovered decks and asked if the ordinance affected them. Ms. Jones replied she did not see where it was any different. Mr. Hickok stated it would need to be a legally conforming structure and that is where some of the problems have been. Kris Schmitt, 7736 Alden Way NE, said she lives on the end of Stoneybrook and her property is non-conforming. She asked if this ordinance would impact the selling of her home in the future. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 17 Mayor Lund stated not as he reads the proposed ordinance. She could rebuild if a tornado hit her home. She could not expand the footprint though to build a larger home that is closer to the bluff line than it already is. Ms. Schmitt said she thinks she owns the property on both sides of Stoneybrook Creek but there is a big easement in there for the storm sewer and storm runoff. She asked if that property was considered part of what would be considered the 35 percent lot usage. Mayor Lund said the easement is still her property. Ms. Schmitt said there have been problems with diesel spills in the creek and when it rains, there is a torrent of water going down the creek She asked if the City was trying to find out where the diesel spills were coming from and do something about them. The whole idea from these ordinances is to safeguard the river and shoreline. She asked about the grates along Stoneybrook. Mr. Haukaas stated Stoneybrook Creek is a short piece of creek, the rest of it is pipe. He said he would check on that. The problem with grates in that area is that they catch a lot of debris, get clogged, and then start flooding on the upstream side of East River Road and then starts flooding into the Onaway District. It is a very short section and unfortunately things do get dumped there. They do check it on occasion and remove debris. They have worked with the Fire Department tracking some of the spills and they are reported to the MPCA. Josh Welter, 77 Rice Creek Way NE, asked why there is an overlay on top of everything. Ms. Jones replied a critical overlay only applies to property from East River Road west of the Mississippi, so it only applies to property on the Mississippi River. The DNR is of course requiring that they put shoreland ordinance restrictions in place for all shoreland properties. On Locke Lake you are likely to have some restrictions from the creek and river overlay that addresses property in the floodway. There are different needs for different property in the City. Mr. Welter asked if there was a way to change any of the numbers. Ms. Jones said they have asked for some flexibility in the rules. Mr. Welter asked what would happen if the State were to change the law. Ms. Jones replied State law supercedes City code so they would have to abide by State law. Mr. Welter stated when they moved here in January this year they were looking at several areas and they liked the lakeshore that they got. They looked at the Comprehensive Plan and they liked the fact that the City of Fridley wanted to have more big single-family homes and they would like to expand their house to cover a little bit more of the property and go to a second level. They do not want to lose that capability. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 18 Ms. Jones stated that is something they did not really explain earlier when they talked about adding a second level. When they talk about expanding a geographic footprint, people could expand upward if they are within the geographic footprint that they are in, even if it is a legal, non-conforming situation. Mayor Lund asked if Mr. Welter was talking about expanding the footprint. Mr. Welter said they were thinking maybe 10 feet back. Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is a possibility that if it did encroach on that, he could apply for a variance. She asked if he could apply for a hardship ordinance. Ms. Jones replied actually, no, they could not apply variance to encroach, but they could apply for a variance to exceed the 35 percent lot coverage. Mr. Welter said Locke Lake is a 50-foot setback versus a100-foot setback for the river. Ms. Jones stated with all the other water lines, it is 50 feet back from the ordinary high water mark. Ms. Freeburg asked how they determined how they determined what was a lake. Ms. Jones said the DNR determines that. Farr Lake is a DNR designated waterway. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 9:58 P.M. 13. Consideration of an Ordinance Under Section 12.06 of the City Charter Declaring Certain Real Estate to be Surplus and Authorizing the Sale Thereof, Generally Located at Glen Creek Road and Logan Parkway (Ward 3). MOTION by Councilmember Barnette 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 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 9:59 P.M. Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, stated this is to acquire property excess and for the transfer of the land. The first piece is a parcel adjacent to Glen Creek Road east of Logan Parkway. On October 24, 2005, the City Council approved the replatting of the piece of property in this area to delineate where the actual roadway was constructed. During the 2005 street reconstruction project, they found that the road that had been in place for 40 years was not where a City-owned easement was. This plat is helping to correct that. Also through that FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 19 determination, they found a triangle of property outside of the area they need for street right-of- way that would be deemed excess. They had some discussions with the property owner about getting that piece of property. Pam Reynolds, 1241 Norton, asked for a quick clarification. She asked if it was a swap. Mr. Knaak, City Attorney, said there is an agreed-upon, defined parcel of land as opposed to having the City declare a certain value and receiving money for it. It is a purchase. Instead of the consideration being cash, it is another piece of land. Mr. Haukaas stated they are not putting it up for sale, but are getting a consideration back in exchange for that. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DELCARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 10:04 P.M. 14. Consideration of an Ordinance Under Section 12.06 of the City Charter Declaring Certain Real Estate to be Surplus and Authorizing the Sale Thereof, Generally Located at Ely Street and Liberty Street (Ward 3). MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 10:04 P.M. Mr. Haukaas stated this is a very similar situation on the railroad service drive between Ely and Liberty Streets, just west of the railroad tracks. Again this was a piece that was replatted and approved at the October 24, 2005, Council meeting. The adjacent property owner has been maintaining the properties. They have been in discussion with the landowners. It is to the benefit of both parties. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DELCARED THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 10:07 P.M. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 20 OLD BUSINESS: 15. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Pawn Shop Transaction Fees. Don Abbott, Director of Public Safety, stated staff presented revised ordinance language to Council at the November 7, 2005, Council meeting raising the transaction fee from $1.50 per transaction to $3.00. The additional fee will provide the majority of funding needed for a dedicated pawn detective. Council approved the first reading and requested additional information from staff. The City of Fridley presently licenses two pawn brokers--Pawn America and Cash-N-Pawn. Pawn shops are regulated by Minnesota State Statute Section 325J and by Chapter 31 of the Fridley City Code. Chapter 31 of the City Code requires the Police Department to regulate Fridley pawn brokers to monitor the operations, including hours of operation, making sure no underage persons are pawning, and so on. It requires pawnbrokers to provide transaction records to the Automated Pawn System (APS) on a daily basis. It requires pawnbrokers to allow inspection of the premises and inventory by the Police Department at any time. The Automated Pawn System is a statewide pawn database which was created and currently managed by the City of Minneapolis. There are 152 agencies currently subscribed to APS; 67 pawnshops report their activity from 37 different jurisdictions. It helps detectives identify criminal activity, solve crimes, and recover stolen property for the rightful owners. Reviewing the APS and the member agencies that belong, they found annual license fees rising from $50 to $15,000 and transaction fees from $0 to $3.00. St. Paul currently charges $3.00. Mr. Abbott stated the first pawnshop opened in Fridley in 1994. They began requiring pawnshops to submit data to APS in 2001. Total pawnshop transactions have increased steadily. Of the top 10 cities reporting to APS, Fridley is third. We are behind St. Paul and Minneapolis in our transactions, and that is from the period of January 1 to October 31 of this year. The APS indicates there were 208 stolen items out of the 46,042 items pawned or purchased at the two pawnshops between January 1 and October 31, 2005. The value of these items total approximately $100,000. The 208 items represents one-half of 1 percent of the total items. The identification recovery process is limited by data quality. The identification of stolen property at the pawnshop depends on accurate information being entered by the pawn shop. Most items are identified as stolen when APS searches the National Crime Information Center (NCIC database) for reported stolen property. This is an automated process. Only stolen property with adequate descriptive information including serial number is entered into NCIC. Only items entered by pawnshops and APS with serial numbers are checked against NCIC. There were no serial numbers entered for 64 percent or 31,502 of the items just in Fridley this year. Of that amount 12,539 items are jewelry identified as having no serial numbers. Police detectives identify additional stolen items by searching the APS database utilizing general descriptions of stolen property to determine possible matches. This is a labor-intensive process. The Fridley Police Department has historically included pawn broker regulations as part of the duties assigned to one of our two general detectives. One of the more important regulations is to audit pawn inventory against APS and to ensure accurate data entry. They absolutely depend on accurate APS entry by pawnshops to identify stolen property. The Police Department's last compliance check audit was in 2002 when they found 19 percent of audited items to be incorrectly entered. A pawnshop's use of the "Other" category needs to monitored and minimized as well. The FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 21 "Other" category was used 12,523 times between January 1, 2005, to November 15, 2005. This impacts the verification of the NCIC check They may get a hit on the field number alone and the detective then needs to go in and look at the record and see if it matches up to the item and ultimately the detective, with or without the victim, may need to travel to that store to make a physical ID of the item. It makes manual item searches by detectives much more difficult. Mr. Abbott stated the pawn detective will increase the detective unit from two general detectives and a sergeant. One of the three detectives will be assigned to pawn regulation and pawn-related crime. We already have one police technician assigned to pawn. Her hours will increase from approximately two hours a week now to eight hours per week to support the pawn detective. The pawn detective's duties will include regulating the pawnshop and conducting frequent audits and compliance checks of pawnshops, assuring point of sale software is being used by the pawnshop and meeting state requirements, and responding to inquiries from APS staff concerning data entry. The detective will be assigned to all cases involving property confiscations at the pawnshop and will be assigned to all incoming property crime or burglary and theft cases involving incomplete property descriptions with no suspect information to perform manual searches of APS records. The detective will also personally and physically audit all firearms received by Fridley pawnshops weekly. Recently Pawn America has begun receiving guns from all of its pawn ships for ultimate resale. Police Department's records indicate they received 15 guns in the past 20 days. Mr. Abbott said at the last Council meeting Council requested that staff outline in detail some of the costs listed as absorbed. The first thing they have to do is pay a$1 APS fee to the City of Minneapolis per transaction, and based on 2005 transactions that would be $32,900. The pawn detective's salary would be$72,475. The absorbed costs include a police detective's salary at 8 hours per week or $7,680 over the course of the year; work space fees and supplies of $2,110 a year, a vehicle for the detective at $2,910 a year, and additional detective support. They figured 18, 8-hour days of additional detective support would be necessary filling in for the pawn detective while he or she is away sick or on vacation. Conducting audits and compliance checks will require more than one detective on the case. They estimate it would cost $123,075 if they convert costs they previously listed as absorbed. The ordinance currently sets a license fee of $3,000 per year or $6,000 total for the two pawn shops. The $3.00 transaction fee multiplied by the estimated 32,900 transactions for 2005 would be $98,700 for a total of $104,700. The remaining $18,375 would be absorbed by the current Police Department budget. To summarize, a full-time police detective is necessary to ensure that accurate information is entered into APS. This would increase the identification and recovery of stolen property which would lead to improved ability to identify suspects resulting in additional criminal prosecution. It would deter theft, which reduces victimization of Fridley residents, businesses, and the pawnshops themselves, ultimately enhancing public safety and the quality of life in the City of Fridley. Councilmember Bolkcom asked about the St. Paul detective and the amount of time he spent working on pawn shops. Mr. Abbott said Sergeant Prois did talk with the police officer in St. Paul. He estimated that he spent 75 to 80 percent of his time regulating and working the pawn detail. He said he could spend all of his time on pawn but he is required by his position to spend a certain amount of it FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 22 working other vice details. In addition, he does have about one-half a clerical type position assisting him. Councilmember Wolfe said DWIs and alcohol-related issues are also a crime. He asked if we are going to charge liquor stores extra money because we have to make an arrest. He asked if we were going to charge the Salvation Army or the Goodwill for the things they take in. There is a record store that buys used CDs. He said he has a problem with two businesses funding a police officer when St. Paul has seven pawnshops and one officer doing it. We are raising a fee to come up with $72,000 and the two pawn shop businesses are going to pay for it. If that officer does something other than pawn shop work, do we give them a discount? He thinks it is unfair that our city owns liquor stores and we are selling alcohol to citizens who are potentially getting DWIs. Do we charge ourselves $3 for every bottle we sell or every case of beer we sell. Mr. Abbott stated concerning alcohol, they do charge fairly significant license fees in the City, up to $9,000 per year. Councilmember Wolfe asked what the pawn shop's license fee was. Mr. Abbott replied the annual license fee is $3,000 per year and there is a$1.50 transaction fee. St. Paul does have seven pawnshops and a population of around 200,000. It is interesting to note that in the first three-quarters of the year they had 36,000 transactions. Fridley has two pawnshops, a population of around 27,000, and we nearly 1 transaction per person in the City of Fridley greater pawn transaction rate per capita than St. Paul. have 27,400 transactions. We averaged For a city our size, we actually have a Mr. Abbott stated in reviewing the number of confiscated article notices that were sent out by the APS, about 93 percent of those articles came from outside the City of Fridley. There are two businesses that are creating a lot of additional work for the Fridley Police Department and ultimately for City staff as a whole. What they are looking at is basically charging that industry, and in this case these two pawnshops, for the cost of that regulation. The Police Department will be absorbing approximately $18,000 of the expenses. If the pawn detective takes a telephone call on a non-pawn crime when no other detective is in the office, no discount would be necessary given the fact that the Police Department will be absorbing a portion of the whole cost. The pawnshops will not be bearing the entire cost. Councilmember Wolfe stated there are other businesses that in a sense do the same type of business, such as a tool business. He asked if we knew if they were buying stolen property. Mr. Abbott said they do not. Over the years they have had very few complaints or issues, or investigations resulting that activity. It is something they have begun to take a look at. Councilmember Bolkcom stated on the DWI issue, do we know that they are related to the liquor that is sold at our liquor stores. We have eating establishments that have liquor licenses. We charge a fee for the liquor license. She thinks the pawn shop fee is fair. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 23 Councilmember Wolfe stated he has a problem with the City having two businesses pay for one officer when St. Paul has 200,000 people and have police officers and only one does the job. Councilmember Bolkcom said to look at the number of transactions. Councilmember Barnette stated he feels very comfortable with the justification from the Police Department. Mayor Lund said he thought the Police Department has given them good reasoning for the need for an officer. Councilmember Wolfe said they are paying property taxes and are paying their license fees. Just like you and I. Our taxes are paying for the police officers in Fridley. Alan Cross, officer of Cash-N-Pawn, stated he spoke with them a couple of weeks ago at the prior meeting. He just wanted to speak on three broad points. First he would like to consider a couple of numbers. The first is $15,000 which is the dollar value of the confiscated property at the buy or pawn value that they thought they had confiscated from the pawnshops. In the calendar year 2004 and through 10 months of 2005, they project those numbers could be right in that same neighborhood again. That is the cash value and the pawn value and the buy value that they bought the property at. Compare that number to ne�t year, using the Police Department's slides of $105,000, and the license fees and transaction fees they will pay and he just does not see how that number computes that they are asked to pay $100,000 in fees, let alone computer costs and personnel costs and things related to generating and maintaining the APS fee. This just does not make sense. Those two numbers do not compute in making value. He knows in the presentation the number was put out that the confiscations were around $140,000. He would challenge where that value came from. Mr. Cross said the other point he would like to make is when they talk about the numbers of confiscation, Cash-N-Pawn was said to have 121 confiscations in 2004. He reviewed them. Roughly half of them were individual DVDs or CDs and were valued at $2 or $3. He thought they really needed to look at a dollar value on transactions and not the number of transactions just because of the way the system operates. He also asked them to cover the secondhand dealers. Why are people who are maintaining establishments be able to buy secondhand goods from people who come into their store and not have to report them the same way pawn shops do. Pawn shops should not be treated differently than the other stores and businesses buying secondhand goods. They may not be aware of how much property goes to secondhand stores or through eBay or a flea market because they do not regulate it. Only a dumb thief is going to bring property to a pawnshop. They are going to take his picture, they are going to look at his ID and record it, they are going to record the type of property it is, the serial number if there is one, a picture if there is not a serial number, and they are going to electronically download that to the Police Departments and the various agencies. He also has concerns that there are federal privacy laws that they have to follow. Mayor Lund asked Mr. Abbott where the $100,000 value came from. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 24 Mr. Abbott replied that they estimated $100,000 and that would be the market value on those items. They show, using APS, the actual pawn value reported for those items totaled. Regarding the estimated market value, APS records indicate that pawned value averages right around 20 percent of market value overall which is how they estimated the $100,000 market value. Mr. Cross stated he has no idea where that statistic would have come from. He said they would not buy an item that they knew was a hot item. That would be clearly against corporate policy and their business policy. He cannot say that an employee may have thought of taking something, but they put a lot of effort into not letting that happen. Mayor Lund said what he is struggling with is whether there are enough checks and balances in place to minimize the movement of stolen property. Mr. Cross said it is a good system. They know it costs something. They just do not understand why it doubled from $1.50 to $3. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if there was any restitution to the pawn shop if we find out something is stolen property. Mr. Abbott said they do request restitution for the pawnshop when they refer a case for prosecution. If it is a stolen property case coming out of one of the pawnshops, the pawnshop then becomes the victim. They do not have any figures available from court that says what the success rate is of judges awarding restitution and the defendants paying that restitution, but they do request it. Karl Hattman, Manager of Pawn America, asked if APS made it easier to track stolen items. He said it was pretty much an unbeatable way to find things. He has worked in other cities at pawn shops where they do not have a way of tracking things that way. They pretty much do it all by hand. As far as tracking in APS the errors with "Other," he asked if that was as a category or as a brand? As a store manager, he is in charge of the employees in his store. He pretty much cracks down when they do put "Other" as a category on anything. He ran a report in his store earlier today. Since October 1, they have not taken in one item listed with the category "Other." Mr. Abbott replied the 12,000 figure would include any use of "Other" in the reporting of an item, not just the category. Brad Dunn, attorney representing Pawn America, said they presented their legal argument a couple of weeks ago. Tonight he would like to ask for some fairness, some sense of rationality. In the last three years, the number of transactions that have taken place at the City's pawn shops have increased about one-third. Council is now looking at increasing the City's share of the fees from 50 cents to $2 which is a 4-fold increase. He submits to them that this is not fair, it is excessive, and is more than is needed. There are other businesses that require significant police resources. Stolen property is not and should not be the only crime or the only issue in the City. He has heard that up until the hours were changed at the Wal-Mart store, one-third of all the police calls were actually directed to Wal-Mart. There is a large number of calls there and a significant number at Target and bars and liquor stores. They are not required to pay any type of FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 25 transaction fee. Liquor establishments pay fee of $6,000 to $9,000. If that is significant, you can see how significant the fee is that Pawn America is being asked to pay. That figure is over and above what they are already paying for their property taxes. If you are a member of the community, you pay taxes to pay for police, fire safety and all the other advantages of living in a city. The city is trying to single out these two businesses and ask them to pay for something that frankly nobody else pays for. Pawn America is being asked to pay over $70,000 a year just in the APS fees and license. There pawn value of items confiscated from Pawn America was a little over $10,000. The markup in the industry is specifically 40 percent. So, if it were $12,000 of confiscated value, you would expect it to be sold for whatever 40 percent is or around $17,000. Pawn America pays $70,000 to cover $18,000. Attorney Dunn stated what he thinks the City is trying to do is excessive and is too soon. How much time will a new police detective actually be spending looking at pawn stores. He does not believe that is the single biggest issue they have in the City and it is not necessarily going to be the single biggest issue the City has over the course of the ne�t year. He thought they should take a little bit of a wait and see attitude and, if it turns out that they really are devoting all of this officer's time to pawn shops, maybe there is better justification down the road for doing it. He would respectfully request on behalf of Pawn America that they not increase the fees at all. He thinks it is fundamentally unfair to single out the two businesses. If they feel they have to do something at this time, he would respectfully submit they do not go as far as they are going here. Cut it back a little. He suggested having a sliding scale. He said they should take a look at some of the other secondhand dealers. Brad Rixmann, owner of Pawn America, said what really disturbs him is that they run the only business where their customers are presumed guilty before innocent. Hence, they are required to submit a significant amount of data to law enforcement in terms of their race, gender, eye color, hair color, driver's license information, and where they live in some cities. If they do not have a telephone number, they cannot complete a transaction with them. They take a picture of them. All the information is sent to the City of Minneapolis and retained there by the Automated Pawn System. That information is then available to any law enforcement agency which subscribes to the APS. He believes it is unfair to their customers to share that quantity of information which is out in cyberspace and no one really has a handle on it. Mr. Rixmann stated be believes it is an unfair restraint of trade to charge them $3 for each pawn transaction. Chief Abbott said the last time an audit was done on pawn stores was in 2002. They charge $1.50 per transaction, of which $1 is sent to the City of Minneapolis. Pawn American does 22,000 transactions annually which nets the City $11,000 over and above the APS fees paid to the City of Minneapolis and the $3,000 license fee. That is close to $15,000. Cash-N-Pawn pays somewhere between $5,000 to $6,000 which is retained by the City. After the City of Minneapolis has been paid, the City of Fridley has retained $21,000 per year since 2002. When they did the audit, they picked up 20 items in their store, and they maybe picked out some items from Cash-N-Pawn, and they came back and said they had a problem with 19 items. If the transactions have remained the same in the last three to four years, they have paid somewhere between $60,000 to $80,000 to law enforcement, and they have not seen the Police Department in their stores to perform these audits. The issue with "Other" is possibly related to compact discs, DVD movies, and video games. There is no other category put those products in. He does FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 26 not believe that Cheapo Records submits information to law enforcement. He thinks this is grossly unfair and is a restraint of trade. He does not believe the City really understands what is happening with the data that law enforcement is collecting. They were unaware until just recently that there were any issues with either of his stores. He respectfully requests that the City reconsider their request to increase the fee to $3, and leave the fee at $1.50. Mayor Lund asked if they felt there were getting their money's worth from the $1 per APS charge. Mr. Abbott said he does. The ability to look at pawn records from 67 pawn shops located throughout Minnesota, most of those in the metro area, makes them more effective at finding stolen property and returning it to rightful owners and helping with prosecution. It also makes more work for their detectives as well. It is true they have not done a compliance check since 2002. That is something they need to do. Mr. Rixmann mentioned that they checked 20 items, and had a problem with 19. They had problems with 19 percent of the 42 items from both stores. They do have figures for the calls for service for Wal-Mart, and it is considerably less. Mr. Abbott stated regarding the 40 percent markup that Mr. Dunn referred to, the $100,000 figure is the fair market value. Pawn is not the biggest issue in the City. There are 38 other officers working on other issues. This officer would deal with pawn shops and regulate them the way it should be done. They will do a better job than St. Paul. They are going to put more time into it, and they are going to do a better job. Concerning identification, that is required by State statute. Mayor Lund asked if the $1 fee for the APS was excessive. He asked if Minneapolis was making money on it. Phil Havenstein, Minneapolis APS, said the law does not allow them to get rich doing this. In fact, they are just this year beginning to return, they hope, part of the $489,000 the Minneapolis City Council provided in 1996 to build the Automated Pawn System for all law enforcement agencies to use. They have never raised their rate from $1 per transaction. Now that they may be making more money than they need to operate, they are going to do a couple of things. One thing they are going to do is eliminate the cost for agencies that do not contribute to access that data. Right now they charge every agency some fee to be able to access the data. Even though they may not have a pawnshop, they pay them a fee; $36 to $72 a month, depending on how big they are. It is arranged by the State of Minnesota. Secondly, they will reduce the $1 fee to where they continue to maintain the system but without making an excess return on it because they are prohibited from doing so by law. Mayor Lund asked with this system in place does he think that it greatly diminishes the movement of stolen goods. Mr. Havenstein said they have increased their percentages of recovered stolen property by over 300 percent. He does not think that is fair to get into measuring the Automated Pawn System or any regular tray of schemes simply by the number of stolen items. He thinks the pawn industry would agree with him that it is also important that they do have fair and adequate identification FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 27 process and security. One of the things that Mr. Rixmann brought up was the data privacy issue. The State of Minnesota has identified all of the property information as public but all information about people who come into the pawn system as private information. Paul Hess, 615 — 57th Avenue NE, said there are a lot of secondhand businesses that are not regulated. The ones that are regulated are the ones the City is punishing. By raising their fees they are hurting them. He works at a Pawn America in Roseville. Attorney Dunn said with respect to the fair market value of confiscated property, he made the statement there was about a 40 percent markup on the value of pawned property and the Chief indicated that it was substantially more than that, perhaps five-fold. He read an article from the Winona Daily News earlier this year, and it quotes Sergeant Haverstein as saying that the actual value of goods is approximately twice the pawn value. Mr. Haverstein stated that is not a quote. He asked to see the article. The statement that they are making is accurate, the statement that the Chief made is accurate, the difference is in the wording. When they talk about a 40 percent markup, they basically are saying they are probably a little short of doubling their costs. When you talk about a five-fold, you are actually talking in terms of the new replacement cost which is what the insurance company would face or the victim would face to replace it with a new product. Mr. Weierke, Captain, Fridley Police Department, said he wanted to clarify a few things that came up about the secondhand shops. While they were researching this ordinance, they decided to look at secondhand shops. They also called representatives of both pawnshops last summer and spoke to them about the issues and about some of the problems they were having. They gave them copies of what they had relating to pawn shops and reviewed the APS contract. Councilmember Wolfe asked they did not look into the other organizations now. Chief Abbott replied because at this time based on police contact, they are few problems with secondhand shops. The police contact with the pawnshops is pretty high. Councilmember Wolfe stated he thought they make a fairly valid point but if the fee gets too high at a pawnshop, they will probably have a lot more activity at the other secondhand stores. Ronald Devalk, Anoka, said has probably done about $30,000 to $45,000 in business at the Fridley pawnshops. People use fake ID's to pawn things. It is known that Fridley does not go through any records when something is sold to the pawnshops. Other cities go through their records a little more toughly. Fridley is one of the highest because it does not have the manning to staff their database. He said the APS only works if you have someone working it. Fridley's numbers are right behind two major cities and nobody has asked why that is. Their numbers are high because people know there is less chance of getting caught here than anywhere else. Mayor Lund stated he does think that it is somewhat of a hardship for the two pawnshops to be hit with a double increase from $1.50 to $3.00. His thought there was justification to look into it. He thought they should raise the fee and look at it in a year. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 28 Councilmember Wolfe asked about a sliding fee. Councilmember Barnette asked Mr. Knaak about a sunset ordinance. He said he has some concerns as well. He is very supportive of our Police Department. He thought their report tonight justifies the raise. He was very impressed with the attorney from Pawn America with some of his points. They are singling out this business. Captain Weierke said they were going to look at the secondhand stores. He asked if there was a timetable. He would rather go ahead with the idea of the $3 fee so we can hire an officer to investigate this and somehow put in a sunset of 2008, and have Council take another look at it. Attorney Knaak, City Attorney, said it was something they could do. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 11 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Pawnshops and Transaction Fees. Seconded by Councilmember Billings. Councilmember Billings stated he does not think they have heard too much different from the public than they have heard from the Council this evening. He thinks the primary question that they have to ask themselves is do we agree with the Chief that they should be hiring a full-time police officer for the purpose of pawnshop oversight? When they are talking about the tens of thousands of dollars, probably millions of dollars, of stuff that is pawned every year, what is $30,000 or $50,000 or $100,000. It is a pretty small number compared to the total dollar value of the transactions. The pawnshop owners argued the last time they were here and again this time, is that really a good return on investment from the standpoint that some people out there in our society, some of whom are in Fridley, are losing $50,000, $100,000, $200,000 worth of stuff. One gentleman indicated that he did that much himself and there are others out there. He is absolutely right, if they write a bad check to buy something new, they can go almost anywhere and sell it for a certain amount of cash. He does not know that they are going to catch that with the current APS, but the question they need to ask themselves is do we need a full-time officer to provide oversight for this particular industry. He indicated in the meeting two weeks ago that he would be more than willing to look at and encourage our Police Department and City staff to take a look at whether we wanted to come up with some regulation for our other secondhand stores that are not pawn-oriented. Captain Weierke has indicated that they are going to look at that. That is going to be a different ordinance because we do not have the State statute backing us up. He does not have a problem with taking a serious look at that. But if we do decide that we want a police officer, we should look at the costs of administering other licenses. We do not try and make money. From the numbers that staff is providing, it is going to cost us nearly $20,000 a year more to administer this particular ordinance. We charge for many of the services that we have to provide that are not being provided to the general public. Councilmember Billings stated they talk about the APS making it easier for the officers. He fully agrees with that but if you carry that one step further, if in fact we are going to provide the oversight to the level that our Chief is suggesting be provided and we did not have the APS to help us, we would have to have three police officers to administer it. So it is a benefit to everybody to have the APS because all the Chief is suggesting is we try to recover the bulk of the cost. The big question that we have to answer is, do we feel that the Chief is correct that we FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 29 need to provide this level of oversight to these two businesses. He thinks they have come up with the right formula, a base fee and then a per transaction fee, because that spreads the cost to the businesses on kind of a pro-rata business. The one that is doing the most business in theory is going to require the most oversight; therefore, the per transaction fee causes that particular business to pay a greater fee than the other one. They really need to look at some type of regulation for the secondhand stores. The inference is if we make the fees too high, they are going to stop going to the pawnshops and they are going to start going to the used CD store and the used tool shop. He said they need to ask why does Fridley have 27,000 transactions per year. Maybe it is the fact that they are fairly centrally located in the northern suburbs. That puts the police in the position of serving not only the citizens of Fridley but the citizens of Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, New Brighton, wherever people are coming from and he is not sure that if fair to our citizens. The ne� question is if it is reasonable to ask those businesses that are helping or causing them to make that decision to have a full-time police officer to pay for it. That is an easy answer for him. They should because that is how they operate. Mayor Lund thought they should base this more on the amount or level of activity. He asked about a sunset. Councilmember Wolfe stated he thought Councilmember Billings brought up some good points. The liquor establishments, restaurants and bars in Fridley, come up with all of their fees of about $70,000 which in a sense pays for a police officer. He believes the fees the pawn shops are paying are similar to the licenses the bars in restaurants have. Councilmember Billings stated the number is $27,000 from January to October so that is nine months. That would mean for the year of 2005, they are anticipating somewhere in the neighborhood of 36,000 transactions, at a dollar and a half, a dollar of that goes to Minneapolis for APS, so $18,000 would come to them. So they are getting about $18,000 per year based on this $27,000. That is why they only have a person approximately two hours a day rather than eight hours a day. He thinks the real question that is in front of them, is do they need somebody on this full-time and, if so, he does think it is fair that the businesses that we are overseeing are the ones paying the fee. Mayor Lund asked the City Attorney about a sunset. Mr. Knaak stated they have two options. One option is to offer an amendment as part of the legislation itself. That would be part of the ordinance that would effectively and automatically terminate it at the designated time. The other option is to pass it like any other ordinance and make a commitment to review the issue. Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated he would suggest that if they are going to do the first option that they give the Police Department a little longer than a year, maybe as long as July 1, 2007, so can give the program a fair test. Chief Abbott said he believed that a period of two years would allow them an opportunity to hire the detective and get him trained and working. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 30 Councilmember Bolkcom asked what a sunset would be gauged on. She thought they should receive a report every week. Councilmember Barnette said he has great faith that the Police Department can develop criteria for this. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to amend the motion to include a sunset date of November 1, 2007. Seconded by Mayor Lund. MOTION by Councilmember Billings to table this item to the ne�t meeting. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THIS MATTER WAS TABLED UNTIL THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING. NEW BUSINESS: 16. First Reading of an Ordinance Under Section 12.06 of the City Charter Declaring Certain Real Estate to be Surplus and Authorizing the Sale Thereof, Generally Located at Glen Creek Road and Logan Parkway (Ward 3). MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading and adopt the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING AYE AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE ABSTAINING, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 17. First Reading of an Ordinance Under Section 12.06 of the City Charter Declaring Certain Real Estate to be Surplus and Authorizing the Sale Thereof, Generally Located at Glen Creek Road and Logan Parkway (Ward 3). MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading and adopt the ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE, COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING AYE AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE ABSTAINING, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 18. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 250 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Front Yard and Side Yard Setbacks in the S-1, Hyde Park District (Zoning Text Amendment, ZTA #05-03, by the City of Fridley). FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 31 Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, stated on November 7 Council held a public hearing regarding the potential amendments to allow a reduced front yard setback from 35 feet to 25 feet and a reduced side yard setback from 20 feet to 7.5 feet in the Hyde Park neighborhood. These side yard setbacks would apply to new construction only. Mayor Lund asked if this was similar to what they already have in other districts. Mr. Hickok said it was. The front yard setbacks would make it exactly the same with the R-1 Districts. The second piece of this would allow a reduction in the side yard setback for new construction to 7.5 feet for each side yard on a newly-constructed home. That allows a bit of flexibility while still keeping 15 feet between that and an adjacent home in the event that more than one is being built. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the ordinance 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. 19. Vacation Request, SAV #05-01, by Blue Print Homes, Inc., to Vacate Portions of 57tn Place, 58t'' Avenue and 59t'' Avenue, Lying Easterly of 3rd Street and Terminating at the University Avenue Right-of-Way, to Accommodate the Replat for the Gateway West Redevelopment. 20. Preliminary Plat Request, PS #05-08, by Blue Print Homes, Inc., to Replat Portions of Block 2, City View Addition, and Blocks 12 and 28, Hyde Park Addition, to Create 16 New Single Family Lots for the Gateway West Redevelopment Project Generally Located at 271 and 281 — 57t'' Place, 5740 University Avenue and 5917 through 5955 3rd Street. Ms. Jones, Planning Coordinator, said she would present Items 19 and 20 together. The petitioner is Blue Print Homes. Blue Print Homes is seeking to replat portions of Block 2, City View Addition, and Portions of Blocks 12 and 28, Hyde Park Addition. They are also seeking to vacate portions of 57th Place, 58th Avenue, and 59th Avenue. These requests will help equate 16 new single-family lots for the Gateway West Redevelopment Project. The Gateway West Project is located between 57th Place and 61st Avenue and Third Street and University Avenue. The property is currently owned by the Fridley Housing and Redevelopment Authority. This project is referred to as the Gateway West project and is comprised of properties formerly used as a used car lot, a vacant lot that once was occupied by Warner Furniture, a fourplex, and single-family homes. In 1976, City Council created the S-1 Hyde Park Overlay District which applied only to the properties located between Main Street and University Avenue and 57th Place and 61st Avenue. In 1976, this area of the City was a mi�ture of uses made up of single-family residential duplexes, multi-family, and commercial properties. The purpose of the overlay district was to recognize the mix of uses that existed at that time and to no longer permit commercial properties within the Hyde Park District. When the Hyde Park Overlay District was created, the City Council promised the residents of this area that they would no longer allow new FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 32 commercial properties and once the existing use had ceased operation, they would not be replaced. Commercial properties such as Commercial Mechanical, Warner Furniture, and Frank's Used Cars would be allowed to remain until such time that the owner changed hands and the use was going to change or the property went up for sale. All of these commercial properties have since been purchased by the City or the HRA. In 1996, the vision of the Gateway West Project included the Frank's Used Car Site and the single-family home south of it. There was an analysis done of the project area at the time and it was determined the project area could be comprised to be either seven single-family homes or town homes, or a senior apartment building. Ms. Jones stated a neighborhood meeting was held in which neighborhood opposition arose. Many people who spoke were concerned about traffic along 57th Avenue. Since 57th Avenue was slighted for redesign and rebuilding in 1998, the HRA moved their attention towards the Gateway East Project on the east side of University Avenue. In 2002, after the completion of the Gateway East Project, the HRA refocused its efforts on the Gateway West Project. A neighborhood meeting was held, and a tax increment analysis was completed. The tax increment analysis determined there was not enough blight to warrant a project other than single-family homes in the neighborhood. Council and HRA determined that single-family residential was the direction they wanted to go and asked staff to conduct an analysis. The image along the west side of University Avenue was the main focus for the City and the HRA for this project. Staff did an analysis of the entire Third Street block to determine what areas were in need of redevelopment. It was determined that the 5800 block of Third Street did not show a high enough percentage of blight to be eligible for TIF financing, but the 5700 block and the 5900 block of Third Avenue were blighted and in need of redevelopment. In 2002, staff started acquiring the additional properties to make the Gateway West Project a reality. The last property needed for the project was acquired earlier this year. All of these buildings on these lots have since been acquired and recently demolished. The HRA's goal for Gateway West is to convert the former mixed commercial and residential area to a viable single-family residential development. The HRA has approved Blue Print Homes, a Blaine housing developer, for the construction of 16 new single-family homes. The attraction of Blue Print Homes stems from their commitment to variety and quality of construction. It prides itself in never constructing the same home twice. The e�terior of the homes will include brick and stone, as well as an attractive mix of other siding materials to give homes a unique look The developer expects that the homes will range in price from $250,000 to $400,000. It is the hope of the City and HRA that with the investment of this money in the Hyde Park neighborhood, the existing property values should rise, and other reinvestment will occur. As a result of the Gateway West Project, the existing properties need to be replatted to create the 16 new single-family lots. The plat will be divided into two blocks. Block 1 will be comprised of 9 single-family lots and is located on the southern portion of the project. Block 2 will include 7 single-family lots and is on the north portion of the project. Fridley City Code requires that lots in the S-1 Hyde Park zoning district be a minimum of 60-feet in width or 65-feet in width on corner lots. The lots on the proposed plat range in width from 60 to 107 feet, so they meet the City's minimum requirements. The City Code also requires that lots in the S-1 District have a minimum of 7,500 square feet for lot area. The lot area requirements are being met on each of the lots proposed. Ms. Jones stated in order to create the 16 new lots, a 6-foot strip of 57th Place, a 60-foot portion of 58th Avenue, and a 60-foot portion of 59th Avenue needs to be vacated. The 6-foot strip of FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 33 57th Place to be vacated will provide additional lot width for Lots 7 through 9 on Block 1 without affecting the right-of-way needs for the road or snow storage. The portions of 58th Avenue and 59th Avenue to be vacated are appro�mately 60 feet by 140 feet located between Third Street and University Avenue. The 58th Avenue section to be vacated will provide the necessary lot area for Lots 1 and 2 on Block 1. The 59th Avenue section to be vacated will provide 30 feet of necessary lot area for Lot 1, Block 2, and the remaining 30 feet being vacated will go to the property owner located at 5859 Third Street. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this plat and vacation request on November 2 and unanimously recommended approval of those requests. Commissioner Dunham and Commissioner Kondrick both expressed an interest in charging park dedication fees for these newly-created parcels which was not a stipulation staff had before them at that public hearing. They felt that because the new residents would be using the recreational facilities in our community that something should be charged to the properties. Based on their concerns, staff recommends that an additional stipulation be added regarding park dedication fees. Staff recommends Council's approval. Councilmember Billings asked what portion of Third Street is being vacated. Ms. Jones said it is 58th Avenue, 59th Avenue, and 57th Place. Councilmember Billings said Third Street is mentioned in the resolution. Mr. Hickock, Community Development Director, stated regarding the legal description, as the streets overlap the public right-of-way along Third Street, there is a portion of Third Street right- of-way at those corners that have been described. Councilmember Billings asked staff to explain. Mr. Hickok stated that is the starting point based on this description. The starting point lies 30 feet east of the centerline and then reading through further as described it takes you through the rest of the description of what is being vacated. Attorney Knaak stated this has to do with the particularities of legal descriptions as they get spelled out in these kinds of cases. Councilmember Billings stated he is suggesting that if you take this and you get yourself a pencil and you put it on a piece of paper and you draw the shape of that particular element that you are describing, you are going to end up with a line and not an area. Attorney Knaak, City Attorney, stated it should be double-checked before publication. Councilmember Billings said he is confused about the vacation of the two alleys. He asked what direction they ran. Councilmember Wolfe stated, north and south. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 34 Councilmember Billings stated for the first one, we are vacating that portion lying south of the easterly e�tension of the north line of Lot 16, Block 21, and we are also vacating this lying southerly of the easterly e�ension and northerly of the easterly e�ension of the south line of Lot 16, Block 21. So they are only vacating as it is adj acent to Lot 16, Block 21. It will still be open the rest of the way. It will be a dead-end alley. In other words, it is only that portion of the alley that is going to lie in a new Lot 1, Block 1. Just that little piece that is adjacent to Lot 16 in new Lot 1, Block 1. That is the only portion of that alley that we vacating. Mr. Haukaas, Public Works Director, stated it should go from Lot 16 up to Lot 26. So it is the full length of the new platted area. Councilmember Billings stated one is in Block 12 and one is in Block 21. He asked if all of 59th Avenue was being vacated. Mr. Haukaas replied, no. Councilmember Billings asked, just the northerly half of 59th Avenue? Mr. Haukaas replied, that is correct. Councilmember Billings stated so now we are going to have an alley that goes from Lot 30 down to Lot 17 with no way to get at the alley. He asked why the whole alley was not vacated. Mr. Haukaas stated the alley can be added to this. It just was not part of any of the new plat so it was not looked at being added to this ordinance. Councilmember Billings stated and then the other one goes from 16 to 26. They probably just need to change that to southerly of the easterly e�tension of the north line of Lot 30, Block 21, in order to vacate the entire length of the block. Mayor Lund asked if they were up against a deadline. Councilmember Bolkcom replied, November 28. Dr. Burns, City Manager, stated if they could pass it and double-check it. Mr. Haukaas stated that is fine for a legal description, but what about the notification. This affects properties that have not been noticed. Dr. Burns asked if it made any sense to consider vacating the remainder of the alley as a separate action. Mr. Hickok stated the plats themselves have been described and are clear. The new question has come up as to whether we should vacate the alley behind the rest and that could be handled in a separate action. He does not think there is anything slushy about the plat as it is being proposed or the descriptions that have been provided other than there is a middle block that has an alley that should be vacated. They can take that on in a separate action, but they do need to FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 35 notify the folks as for some odd reason, maybe somebody would object and at least they want to give them a chance to speak. Councilmember Bolkcom stated Councilmember Billings has a concern about the Third Street issue. Mr. Hickok stated they will have the surveyors double-check the legal description before it is published. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if he felt there needed to be any changes. Mr. Hickok replied, no. They will double-check the legal descriptions with the surveyor, but those resolutions have been offered in the correct form and that would be their recommendation. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve Vacation Request, SAV #OS-01, by Blue Print Homes, Inc., with the following seven stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties. 3. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 4. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. 5. The Petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the e�tent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by the City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the declaration of conveyance for the development that outlines the landscaping and fencing requirements prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. Park dedication fee of $6,000.00 (4 lots x$1,500.00) to be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve Preliminary Plat Request, PS #OS-08, by Blue Print Homes, Inc., with the following seven stipulations: 1. Petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. 2. Grading and drainage plan to be approved by City's engineering staff prior to the issuance of any building permits, in order to minimize impacts to the surrounding properties. 3. During construction, silt fencing shall be used where applicable. 4. Petitioner to pay all water and sewer connection fees. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 36 5. The Petitioner shall agree to preserve mature trees to the e�tent possible. All trees required to be removed for the new homes shall be marked and approved by the City staff prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Petitioner to provide City with a copy of the declaration of conveyance for the development that outlines the landscaping and fencing requirements prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. Park dedication fee of $6,000.00 (4 lots x$1,500.00) to be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 21. Approve Modifications to Special Use Permit SP #04-06, by the Islamic Center of Minnesota, to Allow the Expansion of the Existing Private School and Approve a Twelve-Month Extension, Generally Located at 1401 Gardena Avenue (Ward 2). Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the neighborhood was notified. Mr. Hickok, Community Development Director, replied a letter was sent out to residents not only 350 feet away, but to a point beyond 500 feet of this property. This is a consideration of proposed revisions to a special use permit. In January, 2005, the Council approved Special Use Permit, SP #04-06, to allow a school expansion of the Islamic Center of Minnesota, at 1401 Gardena Avenue NE. The approval would allow a 39,694 square foot school addition to be completed in two phases. In the process of completing work and drawings, architects discovered that an ultimate desired class size of 25 students would leave classes cramped for space. A space of 36 square feet per student is the standard desired. As planned, the rooms lack 10 square feet per student. The original proposal showed the classroom size as 600 to 650 square feet. They would need 900 square feet. The difference between the revised plan and the proposed plan is as follows: the original plan, Phase I, had 15,008 square feet and Phase II had 24,597. The revised plan, Phase I, would have 20,800 square feet and the petitioner has agreed that Phase II then would be downsized to 18,800 square feet. The original plan was a little less than 39,605 square feet. The new plan would actually reduce the size by 5 square feet and overall have a building size of 39,600 square feet for Phase I and Phase II. Changes to the complex are as follows. First of all the wall on the southwest face is moved out to replace the colonnades. Approximately 7.5 feet along the front of the building by the bus loop where the column is, is basically an open space with a roof over it and column. They need that space inside the classroom so they bump out the wall to a point that holds up the edge of that roof, replacing the colonnade, and closing in the space. That is on the southwest face. The wall on the southern end of the northeast face directly adjacent to the former building would be bumped out approximately 10 feet. That would only be done without encroaching on the 48 feet of setback the wetland that was delineated. The parking lot was also reworked to better accommodate bus circulation. They still have the same number of parking spaces. The entire west and south property lines surrounding the parking areas would be fenced and would also include a hedge. The 12-month e�tension that has also been requested was done because there were substantial modifications to the working FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 37 drawings required relative to these modifications if approved or authorized by the Council and additional fundraising time would be required due to the increased cost of materials and the increased cost of the overall larger project in Phase I. Staff recommends Council's approval. Councilmember Wolfe stated there will be a wall where the overhang was on the west side. Mr. Hickok it still has some relief. It is not a wall coming straight up to a roof. Councilmember Wolfe stated from a helicopter it will almost look exactly the same. Mr. Hickok stated, yes, the roof line on that side of the building stays the same. The building wall gets moved up underneath that roof. Councilmember Wolfe stated and on the east side, just a portion of it is going to e�tend 10 more feet and is not visible to anybody. Mr. Hickok stated that is right. It is the downhill slope adjacent to the existing building. It would be very difficult, if almost impossible, to see from an adjacent site. Councilmember Wolfe stated he cannot speak for the neighbors, but he thinks it is still too big for the neighborhood, but the changes that are being made are not affecting the visual part of the original plan. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Hickok if the buses turn around in the parking lot. Mr. Hickok said they do. They have determined the best long-term solution is to have a bus loop that comes up, allow them to drop students off at the school and then loop them back out. This was designed to meet Fire Department criteria. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it was different than the first plan. Mr. Hickok stated, yes, the bus loop still is off the street and comes up to the front of the building. It is meant to do essentially the same thing. The problem that they found though is that the long central island of parking really caused the bus to be cramped at the far end and to circulate properly, they really needed to shorten that up but they could not lose the parking space. For those cars parked at the end stalls, they can back out, have room to actually back to the west, and then drive out to the east. As they see it, it is a better design loop for the buses and frankly from a design parking perspective. Councilmember Bolkcom stated it seems to her, logistically, turning a bus around in an area where you also have people parking and kids coming from parked cars is scary to her. She asked if this was the final plan. Councilmember Barnette said one of the few criticisms he has received is that people who come along Gardena, stop in front of the school, and drop off their students. Will the parents also be encouraged to do the same as the buses? FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 38 Anwar Abdel-Karim, Vice President of the Islamic Center, said they are very much done with the design and are looking at the flooring and ceiling. Councilmember Bolkcom stated so the basic design work is done. It is more of just the details. Mr. Abdel-Karim stated, yes, exactly. Mayor Lund said if parents are in a hurry, he imagines they will want to drop their kids off and go. He is hoping that they will try to get them to pull into the parking lot to circle round. Councilmember Bolkcom stated tonight they are supposed to approve the modification. They do not have to approve the stipulations? Mr. Hickok stated that is right. There are two actions. One is to recognize and approve the modifications that have been discussed and the second is to approve the 12-month e�tension that would take them to January 2007. Mike Wiltfang, 5885 Tennison Drive NE, and said he could not recall from the previous hearing about this if there were some assurances made that high school-aged students would not be allowed to drive cars to and from school. He asked if anything had been formally stipulated or could that change. Mr. Abdel-Karim stated students in high school are not allowed to drive to school. It exists in the student handbook, so it is school policy and is not going to change. Councilmember Barnette commented he did not think the City could dictate that. Mr. Hickok stated there is an alternative parking lot. In the event their parking is deemed inadequate for any reason, there is proof of parking over on the east side of the building that would need to be installed, and the City can decide when that has to happen. Mr. Wiltfang stated he understands that but the other complication in putting that parking up on the hill is that you will involve all those neighbors who abut that parking area. The problems that exist with the Totino-Grace traffic are well documented. He does not mind that there are a few cars parked in front of his house during football games, but it would concern him if he started seeing cars parked in front of his house on a regular basis during the school year. Mayor Lund asked if the additional parking would be on the school level or on the elevated property. Mr. Hickok stated it comes in at the school level but as he recalls the design was to basically use the tiers that are there and create parking drive aisles that are workable slopes that have parking built into the contours essentially. Mr. Wiltfang asked if there was legal criteria that would trigger that requirement. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 39 Mr. Hickok stated there was. In the ordinance for proof of parking, Council at its discretion can approve parking initially, and the Code is clear that at the City's discretion, it can make the determination if additional parking is necessary and when. They give the school notice and give them a reasonable time to install it. Mr. Wiltfang stated his concern is he has already been at a public meeting at Totino-Grace and they addressed those issues. There are people who live along Arthur that have problems with parking. He asked the city engineer if it was possible to put up no parking signs in the neighborhood and was told they could not. Mayor Lund stated they can restrict parking on public a street but then it is restricted to him and everyone else. Mr. Wiltfang stated he understands. Mayor Lund said the traffic changes, they have to put the parking lot in. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to approve modifications to Special Use Permit SP #04-06, by the Islamic Center of Minnesota, to allow the expansion of the existing private school. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE AND COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS VOTING AYE, AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED ON A THREE TO TWO VOTE. MOTION by Councilmember Wolfe to approve a twelve-month e�tension, to January 3, 2007. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE AND COUNCILMEMBER BILLINGS VOTING AYE, AND COUNCILMEMBER WOLFE AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED ON A THREE TO TWO VOTE. 2. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 104 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to Diseased Tree Removal Assessment Fees. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to table the second reading of this ordinance. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Resolution Abating a Portion of the Assessment for Certain Properties Within the 2005-1 Street Improvement Project. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2005 PAGE 40 Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the change involved a decrease. Mr. Haukaas said the abatement amount is how much the proposed assessment would be decreased. It is really the difference between he final amount and the estimate. Most of this is for the driveway work. Councilmember Bolkcom what the process would be. Mr. Haukaas said there is a 30-day prepayment period. At the end of the 30 days, whatever is left they send to the County. These people have been notified that their assessment is going to be reduced by this amount and they still have a little bit of time to pay within that 30-day period before it gets sent to the County. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they had 30 days from today. Mr. Haukaas stated, no, but they are aware of it. Councilmember Bolkcom asked and how were they notified? Mr. Haukaas said they were sent letters. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2005-68. Seconded by Councilmember Wolfe. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 22. Informal Status Reports. There were no informal status reports. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette, seconded by Councilmember Wolfe, to adjourn. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:10 A.M. Respectfully submitted by, Denise M. Johnson Recording Secretary ��� �� Scott . Lund Mayor