10/08/2007 - 29203CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF FRIDLEY
OCTOBER 8, 2007
The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Lund led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund
Councilmember-at-large Barnette
Councilmember Varichak
Councilmember Saefke
Councilmember Bolkcom
OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Jim Kosluchar, Public Works Director
Fritz Knaak, City Attorney
Scott Lein, Global Health Ministries
PROCLAMATIONS:
Domestic Violence Awareness Month: October.
Fire Prevention Week: October 8— 12.
PRESENTATION
Bill Morris, Decision Resources, reviewed the results from the citizens survey that was taken of
500 randomly selected Fridley residents this year. He reviewed what is working and what is not
working for the City and focused on the new part of the survey, the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Morris reported that residents were generally very happy with the street conditions. Those
who were not satisfied were mainly dissatisfied with the neighborhood streets. City parks
received a very high rating. In fact it was one of the highest satisfaction ratings in the
metropolitan area. Other areas that scored satisfaction levels higher than the average included
public safety, 911, fire/EMT, code violations and resolving the violation problem. The citizens
of Fridley feel empowered, and that the City will listen to the ideas citizens have about how the
City runs things.
Mr. Morris reviewed the results from the series of new questions regarding the Comprehensive
Plan. There were three areas most favorable to redevelop: Columbia Arena, East University
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 2
Avenue south of 61st Street, and Moon Plaza. Eighty-eight percent of the citizens support having
a housing code for structural problems, and 81% agreed the City should allocate funding for pro-
active housing code enforcement. Citizens thought their housing needs in the next ten years
would be in assisted living, condominiums in a senior co-op and one level townhomes or
cottages. In-city shopping and entertainment was an important item, with a focus on grocery
stores and restaurants. Fifty percent of the citizens support the Charter change regarding the
utility rates.
Mr. Morris stated that the survey showed residents feel connected to the City, value public
safety and in general were very pleased with City services. The one area where there seems to
be a little decline was in the streets and maintenance area; but these ratings were still very high
compared to the average. In general, what the City has managed to do is to construct, develop
and maintain a substantial reservoir of good will in this community. People like the direction in
which things are moving, and as a result, they are willing to go along with quite a lot to maintain
and enhance Fridley as a community in the years ahead.
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council meeting of September 24, 2007.
APPROVED.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Receive the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of September 19, 2007.
RECEIVED.
2. Special Use Permit Request, SP #07-05, by T-Mobile Central, to Allow the
Construction of a Communications Facility on an Existing Xcel Energy
Transmission Tower, Generally Located at 200 Commerce Circle (Ward 3).
William Burns, City Manager, stated the Xcel tower is located on industrial property at 200
Commerce Circle South. T-Mobile would attach "directional panel antennas" at a height of 155
feet to the top of the Xcel tower. The antennas would be linked to an equipment shelter located
on a 15' x 20' leased space at the foot of the Xcel tower. The Planning Commission approved
the special use permit with six stipulations at their meeting of September 19, by a unanimous
vote. Staff recommends Council's approval.
APPROVED SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, SP #07-05, WITH THE FOLLOWING
SIX STIPULATIONS: 1. A BUILDING PERMIT SHALL BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO
COMMENCEMENT OF INSTALLATION OF ANY FACILITY EQUIPMENT ON THIS
SITE; 2. A LANDSCAPE AND SCREENING PLAN SHALL BE SUBMITTED AND
APPROVED BY CITY STAFF PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT;
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 3
3. THE PETITIONER OR SUCCESSORS SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN THE
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT SO THAT IT BLENDS INTO THE SURROUNDING
ENVIRONMENT; 4. A 20' DRIVE AISLE AROUND THE BUILDING SHALL REMAIN
CLEAR OF DEBRIS AND VEHICLES FOR FIRE EQUIPMENT ACCESS AND
CIRCULATION; 5. THE FACILITY SHALL BE DESIGNED TO DISCOURAGE
UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY; AND 6. NO SIGNS OTHER THAN WARNING OR
EQUIPMENT INFORMATION SIGNS ARE PERMITTED AS PART OF THIS
APPLICATION.
3. Resolution Appointing Election Judges for the Special Municipal Election on
November 20, 2007.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2007-54.
4. Resolution in Support of an Application for a Minnesota Lawful Gambling Premise
Permit for Fridley VFW, Post 363 (1040 Osborne Road) (Ward 2).
William Burns, City Manager, stated this is a renewal of a charitable gambling permit that
expires on February 28, 2008. Staff recommends Council's approval.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2007-55.
5. Approve Change Order No. 1 for the 2007 Mill and Overlay Project No. ST. 2007-2.
William Burns, City Manager, stated the change order includes a$30,980.21 reduction for
asphalt. This leaves a net reduction of $16,721.51. The change order leaves a revised contract
amount with Northwest Asphalt of $271,125.29. Staff recommends Council's approval.
APPROVED.
6. Claims (133667 —133867)
APPROVED.
7. Licenses.
APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE.
8. APPROVED THE FOLLOWING ESTIMATES:
Northwest Asphalt
1451 Stagecoach Road
Shakopee, MN 55379
2007 Mill and Overlay Project No. ST. 2007-2
Estimate No. 1 ............................................................................. $ 254,810.87
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 4
Forest Lake Contracting
14777 Lake Drive
Forest Lake, MN 55025
2007 Street Improvement Proj ect No. ST
Estimate No. 6 ........................................
2007-1
................................ $ 229,647.01
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the consent agenda as presented. Seconded
by Councilmember Varichak.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt tonight's agenda. Seconded by
Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
OPEN FORUM (VISITORS):
Mayor Lund reviewed the rules for Open Forum. He said it was an opportunity for the public to
address Council on items not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes and it
may not be used to make personal attacks, air personality disagreements, make political
enforcements or for local campaign purposes. Councilmembers will not answer to a dialog from
citizens. Questions for the Council will be for clarification purposes only. Open Forum will not
be used as a time for problem-solving or reaction to the comments, but rather for hearing
citizens' concerns for informational purposes only. Please limit your comments to three minutes.
Once your concerns and questions have been expressed, responses will be provided prior to the
next Council meeting to those persons if they leave their name and address. Council reserves the
right to review the responses at the next Council meeting. With that in mind, Council has
responses to Tom Myhra's concerns from the last Council meeting.
William Burns, City Manager, responded to the September 24, 2007 Open Forum issues
brought forward by Tom Myhra. Mr. Myhra expressed concern about what he viewed as the
lack of public input into the City's Comprehensive Planning process. He also was concerned
about the absence of consideration being given to the conclusions reached at the four housing
forums that were held last year. Additionally, he expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of direct
Council participation in writing the housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Burns responded that there is probably room for improvement in the amount of public input
into the Comprehensive Planning process. Staff points out, however, that there have been and
will continue to be multiple opportunities for Fridley residents to participate. The public input
process began with four housing forums in 2006. We placed a final copy of the report from the
housing forums on the City's website. We also provided Mr. Myhra with a copy of the report.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 5
Mr. Burns said that while there was no consensus reached on housing goals at the housing
forums, we have integrated housing forum information (along with other forms of public input)
in the housing and land use chapters of the revised Comprehensive Plan. The Community
Development Director showed Mr. Myhra proposed changes in language and mapping that were
made as a result of input received at the housing forums. Julie Jones discussed changes in the
housing section of the Comprehensive Plan with the Concerned Citizens of Fridley (CCOF) on
April 12. Paul Bolin shared proposed changes in language and mapping at a May 10 CCOF
meeting. In addition to the four housing forums, the City held two public visioning meetings at
three different locations this past spring. The results of those meetings were also posted on the
City's website and there was opportunity for interested residents to provide additional comments
on the website. We also published a detailed description of the results of the visioning meetings
in the June issue of the City Newsletter. Residents with questions or comments were given a
number to call.
Mr. Burns stated that the recently completed citizens' survey gave residents another voice in the
Comprehensive Planning process. Many of the issues raised and positions taken in the visioning
meetings were included in the survey questions to a random sample of 500 Fridley residents. The
responses are being integrated within the appropriate sections of the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Burns stated we are also in the process of reviewing the various chapters of the
Comprehensive Plan revisions in public meetings with various City commissions. The Parks and
Recreation Commission reviewed the section dealing with parks and recreation at their October 1
meeting. The Environmental Quality and Energy Commission reviewed the natural resources
section of the plan at their September 11 meeting, and will be reviewing the water supply section
of the plan at their next meeting. The Fridley HRA will be reviewing the housing section of the
plan at their October 25 meeting. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the
housing and land use chapters of the plan on December 19. The Comprehensive Plan revisions
as a whole will also be brought before the City Council at a public hearing in January.
Mr. Burns said Mr. Myhra shared his concerns about the lack of public input into the
Comprehensive Planning process and Mr. Myhra compared Fridley unfavorably with the process
used in New Brighton. In communications with Dean Lotter, the City Manager for New
Brighton, he indicated that the New Brighton City Council was very satisfied with the revisions
made ten years ago. Consequently there were no citizen commissions or meetings set up for the
current revision process.
Mr. Burns stated although the City Council has not been directly involved in writing the
revisions to the Comprehensive Plan, they were very involved in the four housing forums, the
visioning meetings, and, most recently, the "Corridor Initiative" meetings. They will be
reviewing the minutes of the various commission hearings and hosting their own public hearing
in January. Council is giving the lengthy public input process a chance to occur before offering
their point of view.
Mr. Burns thanked Mr. Myhra for providing staff with a chance to review the Comprehensive
Planning process. If others have thoughts or concerns, we welcome them.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 6
Representative Keith Ellison, Fifth Congressional District Representative in the United States
Congress, said it was a great benefit for him to listen to the business is going on in the City of
Fridley. He said his office is open and he is available to provide any support the City needs. He
was here to offer his service and looks forward to building a relationship with the City of Fridley.
He wants to make sure things are working well and the Federal Government is responsive to
meeting the City's needs. He congratulated the City on the positive survey results and said the
residents seem happy with the services the City is providing.
Representative Ellison has been in Congress for ten months and has been busy this fall. The
big issue is with Iraq and it is a highly politically charged issue. We need to support and thank
the soldiers and Veterans in the field. He was personally in Iraq and sat with some of the
soldiers from Minnesota that are serving our country and said we should be proud of them. The
S-Chip bill has passed through Congress but the President is likely to veto the bill. It is
important to cover all America's children with health care. There will be a vote to override the
bill and he said he is very passionate about this bill. The 35W Bridge collapse funds were
authorized for the reconstruction within 48 hours of the collapse. Representative Ellison has
been on site several times with the President and Governor. The recent funding is on its way and
there should be no substantial delays. A few things that are coming up include the North Star
Commuter Rail. Fridley may not see a stop but he will do all that he can to continue to support
and work on the issue. He said he and his team would do their best to work on behalf of the City
of Fridley.
Councilmember Barnette asked if was appropriate for Representative Ellison to speak at the
Open Forum because it was recently discussed in the beginning that political statements would
not be appropriate.
Representative Ellison responded that he has been to nearly every City Council meeting in his
district and said it would be too bad if Congressmen could not use this as a way to connect with
the City.
Mayor Lund replied that there was no problem with this update and discussion.
Councilmember Bolkcom said that many times the State Senators or Representatives come to
meetings and give an update and advised Representative Ellison to call ahead so he could be on
the agenda.
Representative Ellison said that he agreed it would be inappropriate to speak at Open Forum for
an election activity but he is not presently running for office and is representing everyone in the
Fifth District.
Councilmember Barnette thanked Representative Ellison for coming and said he hoped to see
him back again.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked what was going on with the quiet zone. She said a letter was
recently sent out indicating that this has been delayed.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 7
Jim Kosluchar, Public Works Director, answered that staff is advertising for final bids and
obtaining final permit approvals. There are still issues to address with Anoka County. There is a
chance construction may not take place this fall.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the County Commissioners should get involved to expedite
this process.
William Burns, City Manager, said it is not appropriate to get the Commissioners involved at
this time and he is confident the issues can be worked out.
PUBLIC HEARING:
9. Consideration of a Rezoning Request, ZOA #07-02, by Timothy Nelson, to Rezone
Property from M-4, Manufacturing Only to M-2, Heavy Industrial, Generally
Located at the Southwest Corner of 61st Avenue and Main Street N.E. (Ward 3)
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to open the public hearing. Seconded by
Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT
8:32 P.M.
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated that Timothy Nelson, who is
representing Main Street Properties, LLC, is asking to rezone the property on the southwest
corner of 61St Avenue and Main Street, from M-4, Manufacturing Only to M-2, Heavy Industrial.
The petitioner has submitted a site plan for the subject property that depicts two industrial
buildings. The building on the north section of the lots is proposed to be 47,653 square feet. The
building on the south section of the lots is proposed to be 102,907 square feet in size. The
petitioner has not identified to staff if there is a user for the buildings or what the building will be
used for; however, both buildings appear to be typed for warehouse.
Mr. Hickok stated the subject property actually consists of three separate parcels that are
adjacent to one another, totaling 11.52 acres. The property has never been developed, and
therefore has remained vacant. The subject property is located on the southwest corner of 61st
Avenue and Main Street, west of University Avenue. Residential properties border the property
to the north and east, with the railroad bordering the property to the west and an industrial use to
the south.
Mr. Hickok said in 1997, the City changed the zoning of the subject parcels from M-2, Heavy
Industrial to M-4, Manufacturing Only. Part of the purpose of the rezoning was to assure that the
remaining industrial parcels in the City were preserved for manufacturing, thereby protecting
surrounding neighborhoods and roadways from heavy truck traffic, which is common to
industrial warehouse developments. They were also rezoned to help assure compatibility with
the surrounding neighborhood.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 8
Mr. Hickok said that at the time of the rezoning, the City had experienced over 500,000 square
feet of industrial warehouse growth in the industrial districts within eighteen months. As a
result, there were many complaints and concerns about the truck traffic on residential streets and
the additional noise the trucks brought. There are several areas in the City where industrial
districts are located directly across the street from residential districts, this being the case with
the subject property. Warehouse distribution facilities can cause adverse impacts because of the
amount of truck traffic entering and exiting the site throughout the course of the day.
Mr. Hickok said of the City's 1,148 acres of industrially zoned land in 1997, there was only
89.79 acres that were vacant (7.8%). There had been about a 4.5% decline in the amount of
industrial land acreage since 1979. Examples of this loss were related to the development of
Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, and Home Depot's parcels being rezoned from an industrial use to a
commercial use. As a result the City was being proactive and felt that is was appropriate to
analyze the remaining industrial parcels within the City to determine the best use.
Mr. Hickok stated that the goals the City hoped to achieve as a result of the adoption of the M-4,
Manufacturing Only zoning district, included:
1. To reduce the impact of warehouse and distribution facilities on residential properties and
residential streets from truck traffic by first controlling the location of these facilities in
the City and by implementing site design controls.
2. To encourage uses which provide a significant amount of job opportunities that require
more complex building systems. Buildings with a mixture of uses tend to have higher
building valuation than warehouse construction.
3. To promote clean uses which do not produce fumes, odors, or require outside operations
that may cause noise.
4. To eliminate uses which require significant amounts of outdoor storage.
Mr. Hickok said the goals emphasize why the subject property was rezoned in 1997, and those
goals still apply today. The City currently has approximately 48 acres of undeveloped industrial
land yet to be developed. Preserving those remaining, M-4, Manufacturing Only, parcels is
essential for the City to allow for economic development. Warehouse/distribution facilities
provide few opportunities to maximize j ob creation and building valuation. The building
construction is very simple and tends to have a lower valuation than a manufacturing use.
Mr. Hickok said the existing M-1, Light Industrial, and M-2, Heavy Industrial, zoning districts
allow for warehouse buildings, which the City already has an abundance o£ The petitioner is
proposing to construct two typical "big box" type office/warehouse buildings which would not
achieve the goals the City strived to reach in rezoning the property in 1997. Building height, the
number of dock doors for trucking, and the overall building layout demonstrate a desire on the
petitioner's part to construct a multi-tenant warehouse facility. It is important for the City to find
a healthy balance between economic development and minimizing the impacts industrial
developments have on adjacent residential properties. Since, the subject property is adjacent to
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 9
residential to the north and east, it is vital to ensure that the new use is compatible with the
neighborhood and meets the needs of the City.
Mr. Hickok said Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item on September 19 and
recommended denial of the rezoning request. The motion carried on a 4 to 1 vote.
Mr. Hickok said that staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission in denial of
this rezoning request. If the City Council elects to approve the rezoning, however, staff
recommends that the following stipulations be attached:
1. The petitioner shall obtain any required permits prior to the start of construction.
2. The petitioner shall pay for the plan review portion of the building permit fee at the time
of building permit application.
3. Petitioner to meet all Building and Fire Code and ADA requirements.
4. Petitioner shall submit plans to Anoka County Highway Department and receive their
approval on access and any work done within the county right-of-way.
5. The petitioner shall submit a drainage plan and receive City engineering staff approval
prior to issuance of a building permit.
6. Petitioner shall ensure that ponding area meets size requirements for the proposed
development.
7. Petitioner shall identify ponding area and provide easements for storm water run-off and
management.
8. Petitioner shall ensure that the proposed development meets the Watershed District
regulations.
9. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building
permit.
10. Petitioner shall pay all water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building
permit.
11. The petitioner shall be responsible for the cost of any traffic improvements necessary to
accommodate the traffic generated by the development including signalization or other
improvements, if determined necessary by Anoka County or the City.
12. Petitioner shall combine the three parcels into one parcel prior to issuance of a building
permit.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if residents have been notified and if they have received any
response.
Mr. Hickok answered that residents within 350 feet of the property were notified and no
telephone calls or letters were received. Some residents have talked to Council members about
their concerns with heavy truck traffic.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked how this property was listed in the latest Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Hickok answered that this property was preserved as a manufacturing/industrial location
and was meant to be preserved for those purposes.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 10
Bob Demay, Attorney for the applicant, presented Council with a packet of information.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if City staff had seen the packet of information before tonight.
Mr. Demay answered no.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to move into record the packet of information dated
October 8, 2007, regarding traffic implications for the rezoning which contains eight pages.
Seconded by Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Mr. Demay reviewed the statement that City staff recommends denial of this zoning request
because it goes against the goals established by the City when rezoning the subject property to
M-4, Manufacturing Only, in 1997. If this statement were true today, one would find the M-4
zoning was adopted upon a single landowner. Considering the facts, to refuse the situation to be
perpetuated violates his client's constitutional rights and is dishonorable of the City of Fridley.
Mr. Demay said there are only two properties listed as M-4 zoning in the City--the subject
property and one small 1.6 acre piece of land in the northern part of Fridley. When the M-4
zoning was adopted, staff identified a total of 8 properties. When the zoning was proposed, 4 of
the 8 properties opposed the zoning because it restricted the property owners from their freedom.
Each of the objectors was removed from the M-4 zoning before it even passed. The only
property owner in the City of Fridley affected by a moratorium was the property owner he is
representing. The only property owner that came before the Planning Commission and City
Council, obj ected and pointed out the difficulties and was not taken off the M-4 zoning was his
client. Friendly Chevrolet was taken off of the M-4 zoning because it would burden and restrict
them. Two years later Anderson Trucking wanted to develop a warehouse/office building and
staff recommended approval.
Mr. Demay stated the "big box" concept of a warehouse was accepted a few blocks south of his
client's property. There is ongoing construction on this site and it even received TIF funding.
The Kurt Manufacturing site is not on the zoning map anymore, so it is assumed the property
was also dropped from the M-4 zoning. This leaves the two properties left under the M-4
zoning. His office did some research and these properties are the only manufacturing preserved
zoned property in all of Anoka County and possibly in the entire state of Minnesota.
Mr. Demay addressed the goals from the staff report. The first goal is to reduce the impact of
warehouse and distribution facilities on residential properties and residential streets from truck
traffic by first controlling the location of these facilities in the City and by implementing site
design controls. He commented that the Fridley Rail Station that was being proposed would
create more traffic than a warehouse building because it would create a burden on peak traffic.
The best and lightest impact on traffic would be the warehouse use proposal.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 11
Mr. Demay said that one of the members of Planning Commission commented that the traffic is
already busy and wondered what difference the warehouse proposal would make. The
warehouse would create jobs in Fridley. If this property is designed to control and protect
against additional traffic, whatever is built on the location will increase traffic whether it is zoned
M-2 or M-4.
Mr. Demay reviewed the second goal that was to encourage uses that provide a significant
amount of j ob opportunities and that require more complex building systems. Buildings with a
mixture of uses tend to have higher building valuation than warehouse construction. Through his
research, he found that there are 137 manufacturing sites in the City of Fridley. Whether there
are 137 or 138 manufacturing properties, it is not rational to believe this is a sufficient goal to
burden a property owner and restrict the zone. Under M-4 zoning, manufacturing is not
prohibited. It took City incentives and TIF financing to encourage development on some of
these properties. It has been over 10 years and still no encouragement has been associated with
this property. M-4 zoning has not encouraged a single manufacturing use at the subject property
or any other properties limited to M-4 zoning. The only reason there was something built on the
other properties was because Council granted removal and rezoning back to what it used to be.
There is no support that a manufacturing use would create more tax value than a warehouse use.
By rezoning this property, it would create jobs for the City. This property has been undeveloped
for 10 years. It seems only when there is an increase in tax base that Council is interested in
rezoning properties.
Mr. Demay reviewed the third goal which is to promote clean uses that do not produce fumes,
odors, or require outside operations that may cause noise. This is assuming that manufacturing is
cleaner and quieter than office/warehouse use. This fact does not exist. The last goal is to
eliminate uses that require significant amounts of outdoor storage. This goal has no relation to
M-4 zoning. According to City code, outdoor storage would require a conditional use permit
whether it would be M-2 or M-4 zoning.
Mr. Demay concluded that the background on this property extends to 1992 when the client
purchased the land. After the purchase of the property, the City Assessor tripled the taxes on one
of the two pieces of property that were bought. The owner protested the increase and succeeded.
In 1996 the client presented the warehouse office proposal to staff for a truck terminal, not a
warehouse, which would be permitted. The City Attorney had to get involved and this situation
was the same as other warehouses in the City. After a long time, the property owner was hit with
a moratorium saying they could not develop and the City put an M-4 zoning on the property.
Mr. Demay said that in 2001 most of the M-4 properties were gone and his client proposed two
buildings for a permit. There were seven things to complete for the permit and they also needed
a variance. At the same time, staff was also speaking with MnDOT and Northstar Rail for a rail
station on this site. In 2003, the City acknowledged the property owner would need to re-plat
and pay park dedication fees that did not apply to the property. In 2007, MnDOT said the
property was no longer needed for Northstar Rail so the property owner proceeded with the M-2
zoning request.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 12
Mr. Demay asked Council to look at this request dispassionately and concur that there is no
justification for this M-4 zoning burden. He asked that the request for rezoning be granted.
Councilmember Bolkcom said that the property he referred to that got TIF funds, related to
clean-up issues, an old building coming down and some sprinkling issues.
Mr. Hickok said that is correct. John Allen was granted TIF funds of $1.SM pay-as-you-go. In
order to get TIF funds, the petitioner has to demonstrate a need for the funds. The maj or portion
of the problem on this site was the buried material from back in 1965. Building materials were
buried on site, the property was unattractive to build on and it also met the definition of blight.
The Fridley HRA is very careful to grant pay-as-you-go TIF funds, and Mr. Allen has yet to
spend any of these funds since it was granted.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Mr. Nelson had requested TIF financing.
Mr. Hickok said that a letter, more than once, was received from Mr. Nelson asking for TIF
financing. It has been explained to Mr. Nelson that in order to receive TIF financing, a proposal
needs to be submitted, the need for financing must be demonstrated and a$7,500 retainer fee
must be paid to the Tax Increment Finance Attorney to evaluate whether or not the request
passes the test. Mr. Nelson has been told about the application process, but no application has
ever been received.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if Mr. Nelson had been treated differently than other property
owners requesting TIFF financing.
Mr. Hickok answered no.
Councilmember Bolkcom said it was difficult to respond to the report because the information
was not received prior to tonight. It would not be fair for staff to respond to the report until the
information can be verified and reviewed. She asked staff to review the report and verify the
information before the next City Council meeting.
Mayor Lund said that Mr. Demay spoke heavily about the restrictions placed upon the property.
If this is such a unique piece of property, he asked why they are requesting a rezoning. If there is
only one other piece of property like this in Fridley and maybe in the entire Anoka County area,
it should be in high demand.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to move into record a copy of Mr. Demay's presentation
from tonight. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Demay said on every other piece of property his client purchased, he is free to have
manufacturing or warehouse use. This property is not unique in its ability to have a
manufacturing use but is in competition with all the other properties for manufacturing use. It is
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 13
unique because it is the only property that cannot compete for any other industrial use in the City
of Fridley.
Mayor Lund asked if the M-2 use is less restrictive than the M-4
Mr. Demay responded that this property has been restricted to a small City use subset of what all
the other industrial properties can do and that is the burden that it bears.
Mayor Lund said that when TIF funds are granted, each situation is somewhat unique
depending on the need for redevelopment.
Mr. Demay said that the rezoning request is a separate issue from the TIF funds. This is an
issue of rezoning. The reference to John Allen's property is that by having M-4 property, the
City of Fridley is controlling where you can have warehouses. Having one piece of property
selected for manufacturing purposes only is not an effective way to control where the City of
Fridley will build warehouses.
Mayor Lund commented on the subj ect property and as it relates to the Northstar Rail. A lot of
action can be brought up regarding the Northstar Rail but it all boils down to funds, and the rail
is a State and Federal project. The retribution items mentioned were offensive by nature. The
history lesson was great but the Mayor was not part of the Council back then. The taxation
argument should have been brought to the city's attention in 1992. The property was probably
underdeveloped and the tax base increased so taxes increase as well. This is not something new,
it happens all the time. If people buy properties and bring up the value, the taxes will increase.
The other fees that were brought up sounded like legitimate fees and if they are appropriate, the
fees will need to be paid. Staff will look at the report as it relates to the issue today.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the stipulations for this request were any different than other
rezoning requests.
Mr. Hickok answered no, the stipulations were very standard and the comment that the lots
needed to be combined to pay the park dedication fee is not true. The assessor has to combine
the lots so there is one tax parcel. This is done with a form and the title is filed with Anoka
County.
Councilmember Bolkcom said that the stipulations were standard for each petitioner. She
asked Mr. Nelson what his hardship was with the property and what kind of building would be
built on the property.
Mr. Nelson said that there were a variety of reasons why the property was not developed. The
most significant reason is because of the M-4 zoning. Buyers in the market are discouraged from
pursuing M-4 property and are concerned with restricted zoning. Buyers want a wider range of
industry usage and they want the ability to use it for other purposes than just manufacturing.
Does 185,000 square feet of warehouse building space constitute a truck terminal? This is proof
staff is trying to prevent and frustrate development on this site. Animosity carried over the years
is the reason for the denial, not just because of the M-4 zoning. A site plan was submitted for
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 14
two different buildings and these plans can be altered. The building plans submitted were for
office and warehouse space but he was not sure if the buildings would be leased, have a single
tenant or multi tenant. Whatever is chosen, it would meet code requirements for M-4 and M-2
zoning.
Councilmember Bolkcom said that if there were multi-tenants using the building it would
impact traffic counts.
Mr. Nelson agreed.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to continue this public hearing until November 5, 2007.
Seconded by Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
NEW BUSINESS
10. Special Use Permit Request, SP #07-06, by Global Health Ministries, to Allow
Limited Outdoor Storage on the Property, Generally Located at 7831 Hickory
Street N.E. (Ward 3)
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated the petitioner, Global Health
Ministries, is seeking a special use permit to allow limited outdoor storage at their non-profit
business, which is located at 7831 Hickory Street NE. The petitioner was originally requesting
to store medical supplies and equipment in five shipping containers located along the alley on
their eastern property line, but has amended their request to three containers.
Mr. Hickok stated that the building was constructed in 1979 as a warehouse. The original
building has been altered internally twice since the original construction, including in 1995,
when Global Health Ministries (GHM) moved into the building. The building is zoned S-3,
Heavy Industrial, Onaway District. GHM is located on the corner of 78th Avenue and Hickory
Street. Currently, the site contains a 16,600 square foot building. There are several driveways
into the site, in addition to their access off the alley. GHM has now reduced their number of
storage containers to three (2-40 yards and 1-20 yard). These containers are located along the
alley on the eastern portion of their site.
Mr. Hickok stated that City Code allows up to 50% of the principal building's footprint of
limited outdoor storage in industrial districts with a special use permit. The petitioner's principal
building is approximately 16,600 square feet, which would allow 8,300 square feet of outdoor
storage. The petitioner is proposing to store two containers (each 40 feet long) that would
consume approximately 1,400 square feet of space on the backside of the building. The
requirements for limited outdoor storage are as follows:
■ Height — Containers meet 12 foot height limit.
■ Screening — Containers need to be screened from view of the alley.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 15
■ Parking — 22 required parking stalls will remain.
■ Types of materials allowed to be stored appear to be acceptable but need to be
inspected.
Mr. Hickok said that staff recommends Council's approval with six stipulations because this
provides the best possible screening from the alley (public right-of-way) and the containers are
self-screening. The site plan still provides for the required minimum number of parking stalls.
A stipulation has been added, a deadline that the petitioner has agreed to, pertaining to how soon
the screening can be installed and it has been agreed that this can be done yet this year.
Mr. Hickok said that if this special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached:
1. The shipping containers on site shall be screened form view of the street on both the
north and south side of the shipping containers.
2. No additional storage containers (no more than two 40' long) may be stored on the site.
3. No materials or equipment except that which is contained inside the shipping containers
shall be stored outside either within or outside of the designated outside storage area on
this site.
4. Outdoor storage containers to be inspected and contents approved for outside storage by
the Fire Marshall.
5. Existing storage containers on the site shall be maintained with a sound painted surface,
free of rust or corrosion and be removed at least once per year. Semi-trucks and trailers
shall not be permitted for storage purposes on the property.
6. No outdoor storage may occur other than the storage of items used specifically for the
mission of Global Health Ministries.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked why the petitioner came forward.
Mr. Hickok said it was because of the code enforcement that was done this summer. Outdoor
storage was on site with no special use permit so the petitioner was not in compliance.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if dumpsters in the area needed to be screened.
Mr. Hickok answered no, if they are located within a certain distance from the property.
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that there are other places in the area that need some
screening. She met with the petitioner and went to the property. She noted that the road is
uneven and it may be hard to install a fence.
Mr. Hickok said that the north end would have a gate and the south end the screening. He also
noted that the petitioner submitted the screening plan.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if the petitioner could install a wooden fence that would be
more cost efficient for the petitioner.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 16
Mr. Hickok said that a wooden sliding gate would be hard to create and a large wooden swing
gate would not be advised due to safety issues. The industrial sliding gate that was presented by
the petitioner would be the best solution.
Councilmember Bolkcom said that even with the enclosure, the container would still stick up
above the fence. If they could come up with a plan that would be less expensive and meets the
stipulations could staff work with the petitioner.
Mr. Hickok said it would be hard to deviate from the plan that was submitted the day of the
Planning Commission meeting. A swing gate would not work because it would be too large,
create safety hazards and a wooden gate would not last. Staff would only recommend approval
of the proposed plan. The Onaway District is addressing outdoor storage issues and this is not
the only property with issues.
Councilmember Bolkcom agreed that there are a fair amount of properties in the area with
outdoor storage issues.
Councilmember Barnette said he also visited the site. This type of business is commendable
and they are doing a good thing. The last thing Council wants to do is change the precedence
and make an exception. This industrial screening is a huge expense and the containers are
somewhat self-screening and they really do not look that bad. This was passed at the Planning
Commission on a 3 to 2 vote with 2 agreeing that it would not be necessary to screen the
containers.
Scott Lein, Director of Operations for Global Health Ministries, said that when Julie Jones
called and said they were in violation, they had thought that the containers were self-screening.
They submitted a check for $1,500 and filled out the application for a Special Use Permit. Ms.
Jones called back and said that they may reject the application because screening may be needed.
So to save the application and fee, Mr. Lein submitted the fence proposal.
Mr. Lein said that the lowest bid they received on the screening fence was $4,200. If screening
were needed, they would need to pull their application and get rid of the containers. This is sad
because they would likely need to refuse donations. They do not want to be in violation of the
City code and they are trying to be good citizens. He asked for an exception and stated that he
would not abuse the situation and would stick to only having two containers on site.
Mayor Lund recalled a Van O Lite container in the back of their building that was required to
be removed or screened.
Mr. Hickok said that was a similar situation and they received no special consideration. The
Onaway district has serious problems with outdoor storage. Council could make a text
amendment for this district to permit outdoor storage.
Mayor Lund commented that the City is trying to improve that area to create a better image.
Although Council would like to be considerate in this situation, he thinks the best screening
would be to require the chain link with the slats.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 17
Councilmember Bolkcom commented that the containers were not much different than the
dumpsters in the area and even with the screening you will still be able to see the side of the
container.
Mayor Lund said the screened side would be in the public view.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked the petitioner if the screening was required, would they pull
the containers.
Mr. Lein answered yes they would get rid of the containers and pull the special use permit
application.
Councilmember Varichak asked how long they store donated items before shipping them out.
Mr. Lein said that hospitals could call out of the blue with donations. He said it is a difficult
decision to not accept hospital beds, for example, that hospitals would be throwing away when
there are countries that are desperate for these items.
Councilmember Varichak asked how large the warehouse is.
Mr. Lein said that the warehouse is 12,000 square feet and they can store most supplies in the
warehouse. It is difficult to store large items.
Councilmember Varichak asked if the petitioner was renting the containers.
Mr. Lein said the containers were free to use.
Mayor Lund reminded Council that the containers are no different than a semi-trailer sitting on
site and City code requires that a fence screen them. Staff is being generous to the petitioner by
only requiring a 2-sided screen.
Mr. Lein presented a letter from Main Tool, a neighboring property, supporting his concept of
no screening.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to move into record the letter from Main Tool.
Seconded by Councilmember Barnette.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Councilmember Saefke agreed with Councilmember Bolkcom and Councilmember Barnette
but hoped someone would come forward to help with funding for the screening fence. The
petitioner is taking these donated items, shipping them to countries that need them and the
donated product is not ending up in our waste sites.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 18
Councilmember Bolkcom encouraged the petitioner to go to the community to try and get help
with the cost of the fence.
Mayor Lund said that this is a special fence with slats and a rolling gate that can be very
expensive. This is a pretty complex project and should be installed by a professional.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the Special Use Permit Request, SP #07-06,
by Global Health Ministries, to allow limited outdoor storage on the property, generally located
at 7831 Hickory Street N.E. (Ward 3) with the following stipulations.
1. The shipping containers on site shall be screened form view of the street on both the north
and south side of the shipping containers.
2. No additional storage containers (no more than two 40' long) may be stored on the site.
3. No materials or equipments except that which is contained inside the shipping containers
shall be stored outside either within or outside of the designated outside storage area on this
site.
4. Outdoor storage containers to be inspected and contents approved for outside storage by the
Fire Marshall.
5. Existing storage containers on the site shall be maintained with a sound painted surface, free
of rust or corrosion and be removed at least once per year. Semi-trucks and trailers shall not
be permitted for storage purposes on the property.
6. No outdoor storage may occur other than the storage of items used specifically for the
mission of Global Health Ministries.
Seconded by Councilmember Varichak.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, MAYOR LUND, COUNCILMEMBER SAEFKE
COUNCILMEMBER VARICHAK AND COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING
AYE, AND COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND
DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED ON A 4 TO 1 VOTE.
Councilmember Bolkcom said the petitioner is doing a noble thing and he has until the end of
December to take care of this and come up with funding for the fence.
Councilmember Saefke advised the petitioner not to remove the containers and give himself
time to find donations.
INFORMAL STATUS REPORT:
Councilmember Bolkcom said that there is a debate tomorrow night at the Community Center
at 730 p.m. sponsored by the League of Women Voters regarding the charter amendment. This
will be videotaped for future viewing.
William Burns, City Manager, said that the City newsletter was mailed out to residents.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2007 PAGE 19
Councilmember Varichak said that on Saturday, October 13, the final recycling event for the
year will be held. It will be held at the Public Works garage.
ADJOURN
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:50
P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
Krista Monsrud Scott J. Lund
Recording Secretary Mayor