02/08/2010 - 4556�
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
�ff1' 4F
FRIDLE7`
The City of Fridley will not discriminate against or harass anyone in the admission or access to,
or treatment, or employment in its services, programs, or activities because of race, color, creed,
religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation or status with regard
to public assistance. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with
disabilities to participate in any of Fridley's services, programs, and activities. Hearing impaired
persons who need an interpreter or other persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids
should contact Roberta Collins at 572-3500. (TTD/572-3534)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE:
Congressman Keith Ellison
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of January 25, 2010.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending
Chapter 205, Sections 205.17, of the Fridley
City Code, Allowing a"Towing Services" Use
by a Special Use Permit in the M-1, Light
Industrial Zoning District (Text Amendment
Request, TA #09-02, by Schmit Towing, Inc.,
Generally Located at 92 — 43rd Avenue N.E.)
(Ward 3) ............................................................................................................. 1 - 3
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010 PAGE 2
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
OLD BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
2. Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending
Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code Pertaining to
Commercial Uses Permitted and Exterior Storage
(Text Amendment Request, TA #09-04, by the
City of Fridley);
and
Adopt Official Title and Summary Ordinance ..................................................... 4- 11
NEW BUSINESS:
3. Receive the Minutes of the Planning Commission
Meeting of January 20, 2010 .............................................................................. 12 - 39
4. Special Use Permit Request, SP #09-19, by
Schmit Towing, to Allow a Towing Service
Business in an M-1 Light Industrial Zoning
District, Generally Located at 92 — 43rd
Avenue N. E.;
and
Resolution Approving Special Use Permit,
SP #09-19, for Schmit Towing, 92 — 43rd
Avenue N.E. (Ward 3) ............................
5. Special Use Permit Request, SP #10-01, by
Collins Electrical Systems, to Allow an Electronic
Gas Pricing Sign and an Electronic Message
Center on the Free-Standing Sign, Generally
Located at 7295 University Avenue N.E.;
and
C[iaE:3
Resolution Approving Special Use Permit,
SP #10-01, for Collins Electrical Systems on
Behalf of North Oaks Amoco Inc., the Property
Owner of 7295 University Avenue N.E. (Ward 1) .............................................. 49 - 57
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010 PAGE 3
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
6. Resolution Ordering Improvement, Approval of
Plans and Ordering Advertisement for Bids:
Sanitary Sewer Lining Project No. 394 .............................................................. 58 - 60
7. Claims ....................................................................................................... 61
8. Licenses ....................................................................................................... 62 - 63
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
OPEN FORUM, VISITORS: Consideration of items not on Agenda — 15 minutes.
PUBLIC HEARING:
9. Preliminary Assessment Hearing for Street
Rehabilitation Project No. ST2010-01 ................................................................ 64 - 65
NEW BUSINESS:
10. Resolution Ordering Final Plans, Specifications and
Calling for Bids: 2010 Street Rehabilitation Project
No. ST2010-01 .................................................................................................. 66 - 68
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010 PAGE 4
NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED):
11. Resolution to Vacate a Portion of a Utility and
Drainage Easement Lying within the Vacated
76t" Avenue NE, Generally Located at 480
Osborne Road (Vacation Request, SAV #10-01,
by Premier FMC, LLC, on behalf of Fridley
Medical Center) (Ward 1) .................................................................................. 69 - 73
PUBLIC HEARING:
12. Consideration of a Ordinance to Amend the
City Code of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, by
Making a Change in Zoning Districts (Rezoning
Request, ZOA #10-01, by Tri-Land Properties, Inc.,
to Rezone Property from C-3, General Shopping,
to Planned Unit Development Zoning, for the
Redevelopment of the Site Generally Located
at 244, 246, 248 and 250 — 57t" Avenue N.E.)
(Ward 3) ............................................................................................................. 74 - 126
13. Informal Status Reports ..................................................................................... 127
ADJOURN.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF FRIDLEY
JANUARY 25, 2010
The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 730 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund
Councilmember-at-Large Barnette
Councilmember Saefke
Councilmember Varichak
Councilmember Bolkcom
OTHERS PRESENT: William Burns, City Manager
Richard Pribyl, Finance Director/Treasurer
Jim Kosluchar, Public Works Director
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Don Abbott, Director of Public Safety
Fritz Knaak, City Attorney
PRESENTATION:
2010 Winter Festival
APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA:
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
City Council Meeting of January 4, 2010.
APPROVED WITH CORRECTION.
NEW BUSINESS:
1. Request for an Extension for Special Use Permit, SP #07-09, for the Sikh Society, to
Allow the Construction of a Worship Facility in an R-1, Single Family District,
Generally Located at 5350 Monroe Street (Ward 1).
William Burns, City Manager, said the Sikh Society received approval of a Special Use Permit
to construct a new worship facility at 5350 Monroe Street on November 5, 2007. On January 5,
2009, Council granted a one-year extension of the permit due largely to funding issues. The
President of the Sikh Society recently requested a second one-year extension of the special use
permit due primarily to funding issues. City staff recommends that Council grant an additional
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 2
one-year extension of the Special Use Permit for the Sikh Society for the vacant lot at 5350
Monroe Street.
THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON
THE REGULAR AGENDA
2. Resolution Receiving Report and Calling for Hearing on Improvement for the
Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST. 2010-01.
William Burns, City Manager, said on January 19, Public Works staff held a public meeting to
explain the 2010 mill and overlay proj ect in two sections of Fridley. The proj ect will include
many of the streets to the west of East River Road between Mississippi Way and River Edge
Way. It will also include select streets found east of Old Central Avenue, west of Stinson
Boulevard, south of Mississippi Street, and north of Gardena Avenue.
Dr. Burns said notices for the meeting were mailed to property owners in both areas. Seventy-
three residents participated in the meeting where they heard a presentation on the project, its
costs, and the assessed costs. Participants also had an opportunity to ask questions. Mayor
Lund, Councilmember Bolkcom, and Councilmember Varichak attended the hearing. In
preparation for tonight's meeting, Council has received a feasibility report for the project as well
as a memorandum describing the meeting on January 19. Tonight, Council is being asked to
formally receive the feasibility report and establish a public hearing for the project at their
meeting on February 8, 2010. Staff recommends Council's approval.
THIS ITEM WAS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PLACED ON
THE REGULAR AGENDA
3. Resolution Requesting Municipal State Aid System construction Funds for Other
Local Use.
William Burns, City Manager, said staff is asking that Council formally request the use of
Municipal State Aid construction funds for the City's portion of costs associated with the 2010
Street Rehabilitation Proj ect.
ADOPTED RESOLUTION 2010-07.
4. Motion to Approve Pay Equity Report.
William Burns, City Manager, said under the State's Pay Equity Act of 1984, the City is
required to file a report every three years attesting to its maintenance of "equitable compensation
relationships." Council is being asked to approve the report and its submittal to the Minnesota
Department of Employee Relations (DOER). Staff recommends Council's approval.
APPROVED.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 3
5. Claims (144304 —144418)
APPROVED.
6. Licenses.
APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE.
7. Estimates.
APPROVED THE FOLLOWING ESTIMATES:
Hardrives, Inc.
14475 Quiram Drive
Rogers, MN 55374
2009 Street Improvement Proj ect ST. 2009-01
EstimateNo. 4 ................................................................................ $ 3,146.69
ADOPTION OF AGENDA:
Councilmember Saefke asked for Item No. 1 to be removed.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked for Item No. 2 to be removed.
Mayor Lund noted a correction to the minutes on Page 3. Senator Betzold replied No should be
changed to Yes.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the Consent Agenda with the removal of Item
Nos. 1 and 2 and the correction on Page 3 of the January 4, 2010 minutes. Seconded by
Councilmember Varichak.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to Adopt the Agenda with the addition of Item Nos. 1
and 2. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
OPEN FORUM (VISITORS):
There was no response from the audience under this item of business.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 4
PUBLIC HEARING:
8. Consideration of the Question and Revocation of Animal Permit (Dog License) #706
Assigned to JoJo, Owned by Miles Ware, Jr., Residing at 7470 Lakeside Road N.E.
(Ward 2)
MOTION by Councilmember Varichak to waive the reading of the public hearing notice and
open the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke.
UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:45 P.M.
Don Abbott, Director of Public Safety, said this is a public hearing regarding Animal
Permit/Dog License #706 assigned to JoJo, a male Pit Bull owned by Miles Ware, Jr., of 7470
Lakeside Road NE, Fridley, MN 55432. Notification of this hearing was provided to Miles Ware,
Jr., by personal service via Community Service Officer on January 19, 2010, and service by U. S.
Mail, Certified Delivery, accomplished January 20, 2010.
Mr. Abbott said the Fridley City Code, Chapter 101.05, Section 1(A), requires that a yearly
permit (dog license) issued by the City be obtained by the owner of any dog over the age of 6
months before that dog is kept or possessed in the City. The permit year for animal permits is
consistent with other city-issued licenses, which expire Apri130 of each year.
Mr. Abbott said that Fridley City Code Chapter 101.06 Section 1 provides that the City may
revoke an animal permit for any one of several reasons. Specific to this matter, Section 1(A)
provides: The person holding the permit refuses or fails to comply with the provisions of this
Chapter, any other regulations promulgated by the City or any state or local law governing
cruelty to animals or the keeping of animals. Additionally, Section 1(E) states: An owner
violates the terms of this Chapter three (3) times within one (1) permit year.
Mr. Abbott said the evidence shows the City's burden of proof, as required by the above
referenced sections, either one of which is sufficient for revocation, has been met. The most
serious incident involving the permitted animal, JoJo, occurred on Monday, January 4, 2010.
Just after 1:00 p.m. that day, two Pit Bull dogs owned by Miles Ware jumped over their back
yard fence and fatally attacked a neighbor's dog in their yard. The Pit Bulls then returned to their
own yard, but continued to tear at the now deceased dog through the chain link fence.
Mr. Abbott said Fridley police officers were called to the scene and were required to shoot and
kill one of the Pit Bulls when it tried to attack them. The remaining Pit Bull, JoJo, was taken
from the owner and quarantined at Brighton Vet. JoJo has since been euthanized after he was
abandoned at Brighton Vet by its owner, Miles Ware. Subsequent to this incident, Mr. Ware was
issued a citation for allowing the dogs off his property without a leash as required by the City
Code (commonly referred to as Dog at Large).
Mr. Abbott said following this incident, staff conducted further research into issues related to
Mr. Ware and his dogs. A review of City license records shows that Mr. Ware possesses one
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 5
dog license issued by the City of Fridley, that being permit #706 assigned to JoJo. The other Pit
Bull, a female believed to be named MoJo, did not have a permit.
Mr. Abbott said that a review of police calls regarding Mr. Ware's dogs reveals several calls
and violations since August of 2009. Beginning August 17, 2009, police were called regarding
Mr. Ware's dogs 9 times for issues including dogs running at large off his property, barking dogs
disturbing, and the unlicensed dog. Eight citations specifying 11 violations of Chapter 101 were
issued by Fridley officers and CSO's between August 17, 2009, and January 4, 2010. The last
citation issued before the fatal attack of January 4, 2010 was issued some 12 hours earlier, at
12:35 a.m. for barking dog disturbing.
Mr. Abbott said to date, court dispositions have been reached in nine of the 11 violations. Four
of the nine violations resulted in guilty pleas while the remaining five were dismissed as part of
one consolidated plea agreement at a court hearing on December 15, 2009. Fridley prosecutor
Sarah Kimball reports that such arrangements are commonly done to expedite court proceedings
and does not indicate that the dismissed violations did not occur or that the supporting cases were
insufficient. Ms. Kimball stated all nine violations were valid and prosecutable.
Mr. Abbott said in another incident of particular note, the female Pit Bull was declared a
potentially dangerous dog following an unprovoked attack on a Fridley CSO on October 2, 2009.
Mr. Ware signed the notice acknowledging his receipt and awareness of this declaration.
Thankfully, no injury was suffered by the CSO in this attack in which the dog only succeeded in
tearing the officer's pants. Also, based upon both the viscous history of Mr. Ware's two dogs and
a confrontational nature displayed toward staff by Mr. Ware himself, the Police Department was
compelled to send multiple officers to these calls.
Mr. Abbott said Chapter 101 provides that no additional animal permits may be issued to
anyone who has had an animal permit revoked. It is believed that the Wares are raising four
young Pit Bull puppies who are offspring of the now deceased female. Revoking JoJo's permit
would prevent the Wares from legally keeping these dogs, or any others, past the point where
they attain six-months in age.
Mr. Abbott said that sufficient evidence exists to warrant Council's consideration of the
revocation of animal permit #706 and to support a finding that the requirements of 101.06 (A)
and (E) have been met. Specifically, Section (E)'s requirement for three (3) violations in a permit
year has been met and exceeded as documented by 11 violations of Code. Further, while criminal
convictions are not required under this section, even if that standard were to be applied, Staff
presents documentation of four (4) guilty pleas as proof of that requirement being solidly met.
Staff recommends Council hold the Public Hearing.
Councilmember Saefke asked for clarification on the license that was issued. The license was
issued to the dog. One dog was shot and the other was euthanized.
Fritz Knaak, City Attorney, said the license is for the human owner of the dog.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 6
Councilmember Varichak asked if the State Statute regarding visits to the home is three times
over one year and asked how this issue arose to 11 visits in one year.
Mr. Abbott said the police responded to several calls in a short period of time. The license
could have been revoked earlier, but it was not until the follow up investigation that all the
reports were pulled together. Not all reports were found in the same location of the record
system. It was the incident of January 4 that brought the attention of police to this matter and
that is where all the incidents were discovered. Unfortunately nothing will help bring the
Lamberts puppy back but this will eliminate future occurrences.
Councilmember Varichak asked where the dog was seen at large.
Mr. Abbott said the reports list the dogs in neighbors' yards or out on the street.
Councilmember Varichak asked why the Pit Bull was euthanized at the vet.
Mr. Abbott said that the action at the vet was not performed under City order. Once the
quarantine period expires the owner has five days to claim the dog. The owner did not come to
claim the dog so normal procedure is to euthanize the animals after five days.
Councilmember Varichak asked why the animals are not adopted out.
Mr. Abbott said that dangerous dogs are not adoptable. State law has many requirements for
dangerousdogs.
Councilmember Varichak asked what happens to the puppies in the home.
Mr. Abbott said that once the puppies obtain the age of six months, they would need to have a
permit. The current owner of the puppies would not be able to keep the puppies in Fridley after
the action tonight. The owner can sell the puppies or give them away. If the owner kept the
dogs the City would issue citations and possibly get a court order to remove the dogs from the
home.
Councilmember Varichak asked for clarification that the owner had only one license, the other
dog was not licensed with the City.
Mr. Abbott said that is correct.
Councilmember Varichak asked if the license was revoked if the owner could apply for another
license after a period of time.
Mr. Abbott said that the ordinance prescribes that once the license is revoked the permit holder
cannot hold another permit for one year for additional animals.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if a citation should have been submitted to the owner for no
license. She also asked if Mr. Ware received notification of this meeting tonight.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 7
Mr. Abbott said a citation was issued for the unlicensed dog and the owner pled guilty. Mr.
Ware was notified of the meeting. A CSO delivered a letter last Tuesday and he found no one at
home so the letter was sent via certified mail and was signed that he received the letter on the
afternoon of January 20, 2010.
Anne Feidt, 1584 75th Avenue, wanted to clarify that they have the correct dog's name. JoJo
was the female dog. She has not seen any puppies outside and said that this is not the first bad
dog experience with the owner. The dogs bark at night and are outside in the winter; this is not a
good dog owner.
Councilmember Barnette asked if there were small children in Mr. Ware's home.
Ms. Feidt answered occasionally.
Charlene Wade, 1564 75th Avenue, said that when MoJo was a puppy, neighbors would talk to
Mr. Ware about the dog. Mr. Ware told her not to come back. He said he knew how to train his
dog. When Mr. Ware got the white Pit Bull, MoJo's personality changed.
Mayor Lund said that a one-year suspension is not much of a restraint. Staff may want to look
at this a year from now to see if Mr. Ware should have a license again. One year is not much of
a reprieve. All dogs and cats are not licensed until 6 months old, which is true in all cities that
have licensing. Staff will have to be watchful in this particular case.
Councilmember Bolkcom said that the next step on the agenda is to revoke the license so the
dates cannot be changed.
Kim Lambert, 1574 75th Avenue, said that her dog is the one that was killed. Mr. Ware should
not be able to have animals again. As a neighborhood, they are asking the City to help with
enforcement on this issue.
Councilmember Barnette asked if Mr. Ware had visitors who brought dogs to his home.
Ms. Lambert answered yes; there is a lot of traffic at that house. With all the people that come
and go, she is not sure what animals live there. The Fridley Police Department has been amazing
and very helpful.
Bob Locker, 1601 Onondaga Street NE, said he has watched the police come to that residence
almost daily. This is a problem having animals that lock on to a body and won't let go. Earlier
these two dogs were out there and fighting amongst themselves and the owner couldn't get them
apart. The City needs to create some kind of ordinance that after so many times action needs to
be taken. When nuisances like this start, the process needs to be harder for them to make sure
the dogs cannot get out. This is the second time this neighborhood has turned over.
Mayor Lund said most people would contain their animals on their property. This is an unusual
case and is not common in our community. The City has never had a hearing to revoke a$5 dog
license.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 8
Councilmember Bolkcom said that recently the dangerous dog ordinance was updated.
Mr. Abbott said correct. The ordinance was changed to reflect the dangerous dog law in the
State of Minnesota. If Mr. Ware wanted to have a Pit Bull again he would have to meet the new
requirements including a microchip, higher fence, pay a higher license fee and obtain a$300,000
insurance policy. Cities are prohibited for acting against dogs by breed. Our laws talk about
dogs but deal with the people. The City is excluded from breed specific regulations or
ordinances.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to close the Public Hearing. Seconded by
Councilmember Varichak.
UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 8:20 P.M.
NEW BUSINESS:
9. Resolution Revoking Animal Permit (Dog License) #706 Issued by the City of
Fridley to Miles Ware, Jr.
MOTION by Councilmember Varichak to adopt Resolution No. 2010-08. Seconded by
Councilmember Bolkcom.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked how Mr. Ware would receive notification of the revocation.
Don Abbott, Director of Public Safety, said staff will work with the City Clerk to get the
notification to Mr. Ware.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked neighbors to call the police and keep documentation of any
other dog-related activity that occurs at Mr. Ware's home.
Mr. Abbott said residents have been calling 911 and he encouraged them to keep doing so.
William Burns, City Manager, asked if they should use the online reporting system.
Mr. Abbott said if they wanted to report something after the fact, that would be okay through
the City website; but if dogs are at large or something is in progress he would rather residents
call 911.
UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 205, Sections 205.17, Allowing a
"Towing Services" use by the Special Use Permit in the M-1, Light Industrial
Zoning District (Text Amendment Request, TA #09-02, by Schmit Towing, Inc.,
Generally Located at 92 — 43rd Avenue N.E.) (Ward 3)
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 9
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said a public hearing was held on this item in
early January.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked for clarification as to why there is another action for this item
on February 8 related to the special use permit.
Mr. Hickok said that there are two items. One is for the text and another for the special use
permit. Schmit Towing purchased the property and moved ahead with operation. As analysis
went on about towing services, staff looked at the code and from the beginning to end the special
use permit did not exist to allow towing services nor did the language exist. This text
amendment makes towing services proper. The ordinance takes two readings and the special use
permit is built in but cannot take action until the text agreement is approved.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked if any other towing services in an M-1 District would need a
SUP to operate the business.
Mr. Hickok said yes.
Joann Wernshire, Shorty's Towing said she was against this because they were told they could
not have an impound lot in the city. Now Schmit is allowed to have an impound lot. To tell one
company no and then consider giving someone else one is not right. She also asked if they had a
sign permit for the trailer that is advertising their business. Her other concern is there will be
more usage on that road and there will be big trucks going in and out of there not including the
people coming for their cars. She asked how they can be in business with the City without a
special use permit.
Mayor Lund asked Mr. Abbott to explain the selection process for the towing company.
Mr. Abbott said that different departments in the City were used and a request was opened up
for proposals and a scoring matrix was developed. The company names were taken off the
proposal sheet so when they were rated, they did not know who they were rating. At that point it
was unanimous by staff on the ranking and Schmit came in first on the list. He did not recall the
remaining candidates.
Mayor Lund said when it was discovered it was going to be a Fridley towing company the need
for a special use permit for outdoor activities was reviewed and staff had to create stipulations to
protect the surrounding area. A public hearing was held and some stipulations were refined.
Schmit Towing has agreed to put their truck behind the building. The increased traffic will make
an impact but they will use less traveled streets.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of the ordinance and adopt the
ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke.
UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 10
11. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 205 of the Fridley City Code
Pertaining to Commercial Uses Permitted and Exterior Storage (Text Amendment
Request, TA #09-04, by the City of Fridley).
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said the purpose of this amendment is to
remove some incorrect terms, clarify confusing language, and to clarify screening requirements
in the C-2 and C-3 commercial sections of the Fridley Zoning Code.
Mr. Hickok said that since the public hearing, the following changes and additions were made:
• The principal use reference to theaters was re-ordered to clarify language.
• Standard requirements for garden centers were added into the code text.
• Reference to "Council" in sidewalk installations was corrected to be consistent with
other sections of the code.
Mr. Hickok said staff recommends Council's approval. If approved, the second reading of the
ordinance will take place on February 8, 2010.
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to waive the reading of ordinance and adopt the
ordinance on first reading. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak.
UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
12. Request to Waive Sign Permit Fee for Fridley Alano Society, Generally Located at
6279 University Avenue N.E. (Ward 1).
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said the Alano Society was asking to waive
the sign permit for their nonprofit agency. Alano has a$350 permit fee for a new sign going up
on the complex. They are asking Council to agree to waive the sign permit fee. Staff has no
recommendation on this issue and is asking Council to make a determination in this case.
Councilmember Saefke asked if it was typical to incur a$350 sign permit fee for a preexisting
sign structure with only the face changing.
Mr. Hickok said a permit is required when the face is changed.
Councilmember Saefke asked if a fee was charged every time the surface changed and how this
was different from electronic signs.
Mr. Hickok said it is not about the message on the sign face but about the physical change of a
sign face. The physical maneuver of changing a sign is what the permit fee is for, to make sure it
is done properly.
Councilmember Saefke asked if a gas station was bought out and the name changed, would it
be subject to the fee.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 11
Mr. Hickok said it would.
Councilmember Saefke asked if nonprofit churches had ever been granted a waiver of a fee.
Mr. Hickok said the Michael Servatus Unitarian Church asked for a banner fee to be waived, but
it was not for a permanent sign.
Councilmember Saefke asked how Fridley's fee compared to other cities.
Mr. Hickok said Fridley's fees are closely associated with the real price. The one permit that
involves a lot of staff time is the sign permit.
Dan Hunter, Fridley Alano Society, said he was not opposed to permits but they did not know
they needed a permit when the sign was installed. They are asking for the fee to be waived
because they have had so many expenses with their new building location.
Mayor Lund asked if the Alano Society was a willing seller to the HRA.
Mr. Hunter answered yes.
Mayor Lund said the request seemed to be reasonable but if this were waived, all non-profits
would be asking for fees to be waived.
Councilmember Bolkcom said the issue is we have not done this before. Other non-profits
have paid the fees.
Laura Hunter, Alano Society, asked when a waiver would be granted to a non-profit and asked
why this was in writing if it was never granted.
Mayor Lund said that this is not a discretionary item staff can make, it must be brought to
Council.
Ms. Hunter said she read that sometimes a waiver is granted to non-profits. A tenant is leaving
and she asked if the Alano Society added their phone number to the sign if there would be
another fee.
Mayor Lund said that seemed to be a reasonable request to change out the number at the end of
January. There will not be a separate fee.
Jeff Walstrom, Alano Society, wanted to remind Council that they are a non-profit agency that
provides services for people to get help. They were just seeking some assistance from the City.
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to waive the sign permit fee for the Fridley Alano
Society, generally located at 6279 University Avenue. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 12
UPON VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBER BARNETTE VOTING AYE AND MAYOR
LUND, COUNCILMEMBER SAEFKE, COUNCILMEMBER VARICHAK AND
COUNCILMEMBER BOLKCOM VOTING NAY, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE
MOTION FAILED ON A 4 TO 1 VOTE.
1. Request for an Extension for Special Use Permit, SP #07-09, for the Sikh Society, to
Allow the Construction of the Worship Facility in an R-1, Single Family District,
Generally Located at 5350 Monroe Street (Ward 1).
Councilmember Saefke was concerned whether or not there is an easement or some type of
access to that property.
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said there was an issue about access and they
were not granted an easement by Petco. The best solution is for them to travel behind Target. In
the event the easement was not granted, they would have to present a city-approved access
solution. There is a wetland issue and wetland replacement may be needed. This will need to be
evaluated before we move forward.
Councilmember Bolkcom asked how many times extensions should be granted. As a City
Council we will need to decide if three is enough. Things change over three years.
MOTION by Councilmember Saefke to approve the request for an extension for Special Use
Permit, SP #07-09, for the Sikh Society. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom.
UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. Resolution Receiving Report and Calling for Hearing on Improvement for the
Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST. 2010-01.
Councilmember Bolkcom said on Page 6 of the report under sanitary is reads that $2,000 was
saved. She asked what "nearly as long" meant and why they aren't doing the bigger epoxy.
Jim Kosluchar, Public Works Director, said the epoxy lining is the cheaper solution which will
last as long. They have not seen a problem with any of the line structures to date.
Mayor Lund asked if it was a practical matter and worthwhile to do in eight year intervals.
Mr. Kosluchar said in reality you do not always hit on the eighth year. Past experience is to
sealcoat in three years. The roads are in fairly good shape so it is working. Staff is starting to
review the process in-house and look at what other communities are doing.
Mayor Lund asked if we wait until the eighth year and the asphalt is dried out by then, are we
wasting money on sealcoating.
Mr. Kosluchar said it may be a good idea to review the current method.
FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2009 PAGE 13
MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt resolution 2010-06. Seconded by
Councilmember Saefke.
UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
13. Informal Status Report.
Councilmember Bolkcom said the precinct caucus is on Tuesday, February 2.
Councilmember Varichak said there was an article in the Sun-Focus that Northstar overnight
parking will be available.
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, said Northstar will allow a certain number of
vehicles there and will monitor the situation. Cameras are in the area where overnight vehicles
will be parked.
ADJOURN:
MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak.
UPON VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:50 P.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
Krista Monsrud Scott J. Lund
Recording Secretary Mayor
�
�
CfTY OF
FRIaLE7
Date
To
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
February 1, 2010
Wlliam Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Manager
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: Second Reading for Text Amendment Request, TA #09-02, Schmit Towing
INTRODUCTION
The petitioner, Ms. Schmit, is seeking a text amendment to add language to the M-1, Light
Industrial zoning district; that would allow towing services by issuance of a special use permit.
TEXT AMENDMENT REVIEW
The petitioner is requesting a text amendment to add language to the M-1, Light Industrial
zoning district, which would allow "towing services" by a special use permit. The City currently
does not allow this exact use in any of the zoning districts within the City. The City code does
however allow junkyards, repair garages, service station and other intense types of industrial
uses within our industrial districts with a special use permit. In that regard, a towing service
business would be much less intense and have very little impact when compared to some of the
other types of uses allowed in our industrial districts.
PREVIOUS CITY COUNCIL ACTION
The City Council held the first reading of the ordinance for TA #09-02 on January 25, 2010.
The City Council held a public hearing for TA #09-02 on January 4, 2010.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At the December 16, 2009, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for TA
#09-02. After a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of TA #09-
02. No stipulations are tied to the Text Amendment; however there are stipulations that are tied
to the special use permit, which will be reviewed by the City Council at their February 8, 2010
meeting.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Staff recommends the City Council hold the second and final reading on the attached
ordinance to allow towing services by issuance of a special use in the M-1, Light Industrial
zoning district.
Ordinance No.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDNING CHAPTER 205, SECTIONS 205.17 ALLOWING A
"TOWING SERVICES" USE BY A SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN THE M-1, LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT
The Fridley City Council hereby finds after review, examination and recommendation of staff
that Chapter 205 related to allowing a"towing services" use by a special use permit in the M-1,
Light Industrial zoning district be amended as follows:
SECTION 1.
That Section 205.25 be hereby amended as follows:
205.25 M-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
USES PERMITTED
C. Uses Permitted With a Special Use Permit
(14) Towin� Service includin� those businesses whose principal use is to tow
impound, and store motor vehicles:
(a) The stora�e aspect of said towin� service operation shall be secondarv, in
terms of use, to a principal buildin� that houses a towin� office,
repair/maintenance facilitv for towin� fleet, and an interior stora e� area
for a portion of the impounded collection of vehicles.
(b) The towin� service site shall be located on a street with traffic volumes of
less than 1,500 ADT (avera�e dailv trips).
(c) No stora e� of impounded or other vehicles associated with towin� service
business shall be parked on street(s) adjacent to towin� service facilit�
(d) All stora�e shall be located in the side or rear yard of the towin� service
facilitv
(e) All areas where vehicles are to be driven, towed or parked shall be
surfaced with either asphalt or concrete and those parkin� areas shall have
concrete curb and �utter of B6-12 standard or a suitable alternative,
approved bv the Citv En�ineer, surroundin t� heir perimeter.
(� Areas where stored vehicles are intended to be parked shall be fenced,
screened and adequatelv lit from sunset to sunrise for securitv purposes.
Li�htin� shall onlv include shielded downcast fixtures.
(g) Parkin� stalls intended for stora�e of towed vehicles and towin� truck
fleet shall be separated from those required bv Code for customers and
emplovees. Emplovee and customer stalls can be in the side vard or front
vard, but shall not be within the fenced area intended for towed or
impounded vehicles, or the towin� fleet.
(h) No intercom svstem shall be used in the open vard area if the ed�e of the
vard is 250 feet or less from an existin� residential dwellin� in existence at
the time of this permit's a�roval.
(i) No crushin�, dismantlin�, or salva�e of vehicles shall occur on the subject
propert�
(j) All towing operations whose storage vard is within 250 feet of a
residential dwellin� at the time of issuance of the special use permit, shall
be required to have limited hours of vard operation, similar to the Citv's
hours of power tool use and construction, which are: 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM
Mondav throu�h Fridav, 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM Saturda�
(k) Towin� services shall not be located within a multi-tenant industrial
complex.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF , 2010
Scott J. Lund, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debra A. Skogen, City Clerk
Public Hearing: January 4, 2010
First Reading: January 25, 2010
Second Reading: February 8, 2010
Publication:
�
�
�ff1' 4F
FRIDLE7`
Date
To:
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
February 2, 2010
William Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Manager
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: Second Reading of Ordinance for Text Amendment TA #09-04 Pertaining to Commercial
Permitted Uses and Exterior Storage, Including Garden Centers
Background
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 16, 2009 regarding text amendment
TA#09-04. The Commission unanimously recommended approval of the text amendment. On January 4,
2010, the City Council held a public hearing regarding text amendment TA #09-04. During the public
hearing discussion, Council recommended some changes to this text amendment, proposed by staff to
clarify the intent of certain sections of the commercial zoning code. The City Council reviewed the
proposed changes during the first reading of the attached ordinance, which was held at the last Council
meeting on January 25. No additional changes were proposed at the first reading.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council hold the second and final reading for the attached ordinance for text
amendment, TA#09-04, amending Sections 205.14 and 205.15 of Fridley's Zoning Code. Staff believes
that the revised amendment will help staff accomplish the goal of this text amendment, which was to
clarify permitted use and exterior storage language in the C-2 and C-3 commercial sections of the Fridley
Zoning Code.
Staff further recommends that the City Council approve the attached summary ordinance for publication.
This will save the City the expense of publishing the full five-page text amendment. This is standard
practice for a lengthy text amendment.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE CHAPTER 205.14,
GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICT C-2, AND CHAPTER 205.15, GENERAL
SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT C-3, AND SUMMARY
I. Title
An ordinance of the City of Fridley, Minnesota, amending the Fridley City Code to
clarify permitted uses and exterior storage regulations in commercial zoning districts.
II. Summarv
The City Council of the City of Fridley does hereby ordain as follows:
That Chapter 205.14 and Chapter 205.15 are hereby amended to coordinate the
requirements enumerated in these chapters with related requirements that have been
amended in these same chapters over time. In addition, stipulations normally placed on
garden centers are now incorporated into the code. In summary, the amendments clarify
in print the common interpretation of previous code language.
III. Notice
This title and summary has been published to clearly inform the public of the intent and
effect of the City of Fridley's Zoning Code. A copy of the ordinance, in its entirety, is
available for inspection by any person during regular business hours at the offices of the
City Clerk of the City of Fridley, 6431 University Ave N.E., Fridley, MN.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY
THIS DAY OF .
SCOTT J. LUND, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN, CITY CLERK
Public Hearing: December 16, 2009 and January 4, 2010
First Reading: January 25, 2010
Second Reading: February 8, 2010
Published:
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 205 OF THE FRIDLEY CITY CODE
PERTAINING TO COMMERCIAL USES PERMITTED AND EXTERIOR STORAGE
The City Council of the City of Fridley hereby finds, after review, examination and
recommendation of staff, that the Fridley City Code be hereby amended as follows:
Section 1: That Section 205.14.1, General Business District Regulations, of the Fridley City
Code be hereby amended as follows:
1. USES PERMITTED
A. Principal Uses.
The following are principal uses in C-2 Districts:
(1) All uses allowed under G1 Principal Uses and CR-1 Principal Uses of this Chapter.
(2) Office facilities, including general business offices, corporate headquarter facilities
and major employment offices.
(3) �'� �e�ges Fraternal or�anizations, � assembly facilities and theaters, not
�
including drive-in theaters.
Section 2: That Section 205.14.1, General Business District Regulations, of the Fridley City
Code be hereby amended as follows:
1. USES PERMITTED
C. Uses Permitted With A Special Use Permit.
.
(1�1) Arcades.
(1�2) Garden centers or nurseries which require outside display or storage of
merchandise-, accordin� to the followin� requirements:
(a) Materials are stored inside a permanent structure, attached to and architecturallX
compatible with the principal structure;
(b) Products containin� chemical fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides must be stored
in a roofed and contained area where water runoff cannot reach the exterior
landscape or storm sewer.
(c) Floor draina�e for �arden center/nurserv must protect storm and �round water
sources bv followin� Stormwater Best Mana�ement Practices (BMP's�,
includin� a stormwater pollution prevention plan.
(d) No merchandise can be sold or displaved outside the �arden center walls.
(e) No off-season stora�e can occur in the outdoor sale area unless specified in the
special use permit.
(� No intercom svstem shall be used in the �arden center area if site is directly
adj acent to residentiallv zoned propert�
(g) Creation of the �arden center shall not disrupt safe traffic flow throu�h the site.
(remainder of section renumbered accordingly)
Section 3: That Section 205.14.7, General Business District Regulations, of the Fridley City
Code be hereby amended as follows:
7. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
B. Exterior Storage.
(1) Nothing shall be stored in the required front yard.
(2) All materials and commercial equipment shall be kept in a building or shall be fully
screened, so as not to be visible from any public right-of way or adjoining property of
a different district.
Section 4: That Section 205.14.7, General Business District Regulations, of the Fridley City
Code be hereby amended as follows:
7. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
D. Screening.
(1) Screening of off-street parking shall be required for:
(a) Any off-street parking area requiring more than four (4) spaces or adj oining a
residential district.
(b) Any driveway to a parking area of four (4) or more spaces is within thirty (30)
feet of an adjoining residential district.
(2) Where any commercial district is adjacent to a public right-of-way or across from any
residential district, the following requirements must be met:
(a) There shall be a five (5) foot sidewalk easement provided along the property line.
�� The Citv may allow the applicant to delay the installation of the sidewalk,
if the applicant signs an agreement that it will be constructed when the City
requires the installation.
(b) There shall be a fifteen (15) foot planting strip located behind the required
sidewalk that is substantial enough to create a physical separation between the
public right-of-way and the commercial property.
(3) All trash or garbage storage receptacles must be located in the rear or side yard and be
totally screened from view from any public right-of-way. Provisions must be taken to
protect screening from vehicle damage.
(4) All raw materials, supplies, finished or semi-finished products and equipment, not
including motor vehicles, shall be stored within an enclosed building or be screened
on all sides from view from a public right-of-way or an adjoining property by a fence
or other approved screen which extends two (2) feet above the highest item to be
stored with the height of the fence not to exceed eight (8) feet except where:-
(a) A Special Use Permit has been issued for open sales or display.
(b) Materials and equipment are being used for construction on premises.
„
,� _.-..�.':�.�:.;,.,,�.,,. :R.,.�;, ,:�.�.,�_..,�;"_:
Section 5: That Section 205.15, General Shopping Center District Regulations, of the
Fridley City Code be hereby amended as follows:
1. USES PERMITTED
A. Principal Uses.
The following are principal uses in C-3 Districts:
(1) Commercial laundry and dry cleaning establishments.
(2) All uses allowed under G1 Principal Uses and C-2 Principal Uses of this Chapter,
provided they meet one of the following conditions:
(a) All uses are located within a shopping center building or a cluster of three (3) or
more uses using common or shared parking facilities, or
(b) The use facilities require a minimum of �98 50 parking spaces, or.-
(c) Sexually oriented businesses as defined and regulated in Chapter 127 of the
Fridley City Code. (Ref. 966).
Section 6: That Section 205.15.1, General Shopping Center District Regulations, of the
Fridley City Code be hereby amended as follows:
1. USES PERMITTED
C. Uses Permitted With �a Special Use Permit.
. •
(1�0) Garden centers or nurseries which require outside display or storage of
merchandise-, accordin� to the followin� requirements:
(a) Materials are stored inside a permanent structure, attached to and architecturallX
compatible with the principal structure:
(b) Products containin� chemical fertilizers, pesticides, or herbicides must be stored
in a roofed and contained area where water runoff cannot reach the exterior
landscape or storm sewer.
(c) Floor draina�e for �arden center/nurserv must protect storm and �round water
sources bv followin� Stormwater Best Mana�ement Practices (BMP's�,
includin� a stormwater pollution prevention plan.
(d) No merchandise can be sold or displaved outside the �arden center walls.
(e) No off-season stora�e can occur in the outdoor sale area unless specified in the
special use permit.
(� No intercom svstem shall be used in the �arden center area if site is directlX
adj acent to residentiallv zoned propert�
(g) Creation of the �arden center shall not disrupt safe traffic flow throu�h the site.
(remainder of section renumbered accordingly)
Section 7: That Section 205.15, General Shopping Center District Regulations, of the
Fridley City Code be hereby amended as follows:
7. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
D. Screening.
(1) Screening of off-street parking shall be required for:
(a) Any off-street parking area requiring more than four (4) spaces or adj oining a
residential district.
(b) Any driveway to a parking area of four (4) or more spaces is within thirty (30)
feet of an adjoining residential district.
(2) Where any commercial district is adjacent to a public right-of-way or across from any
residential district, the following requirements must be met:
(a) There shall be a five (5) foot sidewalk easement provided along the property line.
Council may allow the applicant to delay the installation of the sidewalk, if the
applicant signs an agreement that it will be constructed when the City requires the
installation.
(b) There shall be a fifteen (15) foot planting strip located behind the required
sidewalk that is substantial enough to create a physical separation between the
public right-of-way and the commercial property.
(3) All trash or garbage storage receptacles must be located in the rear or side yard and be
totally screened from view from any public right-of-way. Provisions must be taken to
protect screening from vehicle damage.
(4) All raw materials, supplies, finished or semi-finished products and equipment, not
including motor vehicles, shall be stored within an enclosed building or be screened
on all sides from view from a public right-of-way or an adjoining property by a fence
or other approved screen which extends two (2) feet above the highest item to be
stored with the height of the fence not to exceed eight (8) feet except where:
(a) A Special Use Permit has been issued for open sales or display.
(b) Materials and equipment are being used for construction on premises.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
DAY OF 2010.
SCOTT J. LUND, MAYOR
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN, CITY CLERK
Public Hearing: December 16, 2009 and January 4, 2010
First Reading: January 25, 2010
Second Reading: February 8, 2010
Published:
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
January 20, 2010
Chairperson Kondrick called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 6:58 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Leroy Oquist, David Kondrick, Brad Dunham, Jack Velin, Marcy Sibel,
and Brad Sielaff
MEMBERS ABSENT: Dean Saba
OTHERS PRESENT: Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
John Simpson, Collins Electrical Systems
Terry Rath, Holiday Store #118, 200 57t'' Avenue East
Hugh Robinson, Tri-Land Properties, Inc.
Brady Russelman, MFRA, Inc.
Tim Keane, Malkerson Gunn Martin LLP for Tri-Land Properties, Inc.
Mark Anderson, MFRA, Inc.
Approval of Minutes: December 16, 2009
MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Commissioner
Sielaff.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PUBLIC HEARING
Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #10-01, by Collins Electrical Systems, to allow an
electronic gas pricing sign and an electronic message center on the free-standing sign,
generally located at 7295 University Avenue NE.
MOTION by Commissioner Velin to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:02
P.M.
Stacy Stromberg, Planner, stated the petitioner, Collins Electrical Systems, who is representing Holiday
Companies, is requesting a special use permit to allow an electronic gas pricing sign and an electronic
reader board to replace the manual existing gas pricing and reader board on the existing pylon sign at the
Holiday Gas Station/Taco Bell which is located at 7295 University Avenue.
Ms. Stromberg stated a 70 square foot free-standing sign already exists on the subject property. The
petitioner is planning to remove the existing manual gas pricing sign and manual reader board sign and
replace them with electronic LED signs. The installation of the two electronic signs will bring the total
sign area to 80 square feet.
Ms. Stromberg stated the subject property is located on the southeast corner of 73rd Avenue and
University Avenue. The property is zoned G2, General Business. Motor vehicle fuel and oil dispensing
services are a permitted special use in the G2, General Business zoning district. In 1998, a special use
permit was issued to allow an automobile service station, a car wash and a drive-in type establishment.
As a result, the property was developed in 1998, with the construction of the existing service station, Taco
Bell restaurant and car wash building. A sign permit for the existing pylon sign was also obtained in
1998. In 2002, when Holiday Companies purchased the property, the sign faces on the pylon sign were
changed to recognize the change in ownership.
Ms. Stromberg stated electronic changeable signs are an approved special use in any zoning district,
except residential, provided the message doe not change more often than once every 45 seconds. The sign
also needs to be in conformance with the sign requirements for the zoning district, in which the property
is located. The subject property is zoned, G2 General Business, which requires that free standing signage
cannot exceed 80 square feet in size. The existing sign meets that size requirement as will the re-face of
the e�sting manual signs with the electronic signs. The total sign area after the modifications will be 80
square feet, with the new electronic gas pricing sign being 15 square feet, and the electronic reader board
portion being 312 square feet. The total electronic signage portion on this sign is 46.2 square feet on a
total 80 square foot sign.
Ms. Stromberg stated the free-standing sign meets all other sign code requirements including, but not
limited to, size, setbacks, and height. City staff has not heard from any neighboring property owners.
Ms. Stromberg stated City staff recommends approval of the special use permit as electronic changeable
signs are an approved special use in the commercial zoning district, provided the sign complies with Code
requirements, subject to stipulations.
Ms. Stromberg stated City staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following
stipulations be attached:
1. The petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to installing
any signage on site.
2. Message on L.E.D. sign shall
214.07 ofthe Fridley City Code.
3. Message on L.E.D. sign shall
traffic in the area.
not change more often than authorized under Section
never flash or have motion that may distract vehicular
Chairperson Kondrick asked for a representative from Collins Electrical Systems to come forward.
John Simpson, Collins Electrical Systems, stated he is one of the lead technicians who actually works on
the signs and is part of the install team. He also does all the permit pulling for all the cities they have
been working on for Holiday Station stores.
Chairperson Kondrick asked Mr. Simpson if he had any problems with the stipulations, and does he
understand them and concur with them?
Mr. Simpson stated as a representative of Holiday Station stores, Holiday is aware of the stipulations and
they are okay with them and have given the go ahead.
MOTION by Commissioner Velin to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Sibel.
2
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 7:12
P.M.
Chairperson Kondrick stated we have had this before, and he does not see this is going to be a problem
for the City.
MOTION by Commissioner Oquist approving Special Use Permit, SP #10-01, by Collins Electrical
Systems, to allow an electronic gas pricing sign and an electronic message center on the free-standing
sign, generally located at 7295 University Avenue NE with the following stipulations:
1. The petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to installing
any signage on site.
2. Message on L.E.D. sign shall
214.07 ofthe Fridley City Code.
3. Message on L.E.D. sign shall
traffic in the area.
Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff.
not change more often than authorized under Section
never flash or have motion that may distract vehicular
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. PUBLIC HEARING
Consideration of a Vacation, SAV 10-01, by Premier FMC, LLC, on behalf of Fridley
Medical Center, to allow the vacation of a utility and drainage easement across Osborne
Manor Second Addition, generally located at 480 Osborne Road NE.
Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated 52 years ago this month, Osborne Manor 2nd
Addition`s Plat was recorded. The plat was designed as a 12-lot plat, with 6 single-family lots facing
Osborne Road and 6 single-family lots facing what was then platted as 76t'' Avenue, NE. A utility and
drainage easement ran east to west, between the north and south sets of 6 lots. It is that easement being
considered for vacation today.
Mr. Hickok stated the Osborne Manor 2nd Addition plat was filed, but never built as a single-family
development. Instead, a church occupied the land until it was purchased years later to become part of the
hospital campus. The right-of-way for this short segment of 76t'' Avenue was vacated on October 3, 1988.
North Suburban Hospital District now owns the property where 76t'' Avenue's right-of-way was once
depicted and they also own the remaining land area included in the original Osborne Manor 2"d Addition
plat, including the land beneath the easement to be vacated.
Mr. Hickok stated the North Suburban Hospital District has now received preliminary approval for a new
plat called Unity Addition. As part of that process it was discovered that though 76t'' Avenue was properly
vacated in 1988, the residual residential easement was not. The best approach to easement vacation is
always formal action to vacate and to attach the public record at time of filing the new plat at the County
Recorder's office.
Mr. Hickok stated what was once intended as an easement for utility access to 12 single family lots, is
not the same type of easement that would be required for the new Fridley Medical Center and Virginia
Piper Cancer Center that has been reviewed and approved through the Special Use Permit process. In fact,
not only is this easement not needed, it is lying in a location that would eventually be underneath the
building for these new uses.
Mr. Hickok stated, historically, the City looks for a replacement easement to be dedicated by the
petitioner when a vacation is requested. In this case the City has obtained the required easements through
the platting process for the subsequent Fridley Medical Center Plat. Therefore, no additional easements
will be required. Consequently, staff recommends approval of the requested easement vacation without
stipulations.
Robert Foster, attorney for Premier FMC, stated they have an early start approval and he would bet by
next week they would start grading on the project and start putting footings in after that. They anticipate
closing on bonds two to three weeks after that and they still believe they will be on target to have this
whole thing done by approximately September 1.
MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 7:13
P.M.
MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff approving Vacation, SAV #10-01, by Premier FMC, LLC, on behalf
of Fridley Medical Center, to allow the vacation of a utility and drainage easement across Osborne Manor
Second Addition, generally located at 480 Osborne Road NE. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. PUBLIC HEARING
Consideration of Rezoning ZOA #10-01, by Tri-Land Properties, Inc., to rezone from C-3,
General Shopping to PUD (Planned Unit Development) Zoning, for the redevelopment of
the site, legally described as Holiday North Second Addition, generally located at 244, 246,
248, and 250 — 57t" Avenue NE.
MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Sibel.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:14
P.M.
Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner, Glenn Johnson of Tri-Land Properties Inc., from Westchester,
Illinois, owner of the subject property at 250 57t'' Avenue, is seeking to rezone the property from G3,
General Shopping to PUD, Planned Unit Development. The purpose of the rezoning is to allow for the
redevelopment of the entire site to what the developer is calling The Fridley Market.
Ms. Stromberg stated Tri-Land Properties Inc, is proposing to redevelop the e�sting Cub Foods/Fridley
Liquor Store site. The redevelopment will allow for structural changes to the existing building,
modernization of the existing building exterior fa�ade, and construction of new retail buildings along the
north side of the properiy as well as the south side of the properiy. The site will also undergo
reconstruction of the parking lot and entrances to promote multi-modal access, and installation of 146
new trees and landscaping.
0
Ms. Stromberg stated the redevelopment is proposed to occur in several phases. The first phase will
include construction of an addition to the east side of the existing building, which will house the Fridley
Liquor Store as well as space for three, 1,200 square foot retail shops. Once the addition is completed,
Phase 2A involves Cub Foods beginning construction on their new space. They will move their store to
the east side of the building and will occupy 65,000 square feet of space, which is a smaller building
footprint then what they currently occupy. Cub Foods will remain open and in business within their
existing space until their new space is ready to open. The e�sting building will actually be reduced
approximately 21,000 square feet, which will be achieved by removal of a portion of the front of the
building.
Ms. Stromberg stated Phase 2B will include the construction of "Retail A", which is a 10,500 square
foot building that is located on the north side of the site, just south of 57t'' Avenue. Phase 3A, includes
removal of the front portion of the building for "Anchor A" as well as construction of a pedestrian
connection from 57t'' Avenue to the main building. Phase 3B, includes the construction of another retail
building on the north side of the site, to be 9,600 square feet in size. Phase 4 will allow for the
development of the south side of the subject property with the construction of a 29,000 square foot
building, proposed to be shared between two tenants. Reconstruction of the parking lot and installation of
landscaping will take place throughout all the proposed phases.
Ms. Stromberg stated in 1966, the original 165,000 square foot building was constructed. There has
only been one addition to the original building, which was a 360 square foot addition in 1995 to allow for
shopping cart storage. Several interior modifications have been made to the building over the years.
Special use permits were also issued over the years for a mobile home sales office, a photo booth in the
parking lot and for garden centers. The lot has been replatted to allow for the creation of the existing
Holiday gas station lot.
Ms. Stromberg stated two variances were also granted on the subject property since it was originally
developed, one to reduce the amount of required parking stalls and another to a11ow the construction of a
loading dock facing the public right-of-way. With the exception of a parking lot reconfiguration in the
late 1990's, the site has not changed substantially over the last 40 plus years.
Ms. Stromberg stated in the mid 2000's, City staff had been contacted by Holiday Companies, who was
the owner at the time, about the redevelopment of the subject properiy. Shortly after our discussions with
them, they sold the property to Tri-Land Properties, Inc. Tri-land is now pursuing redevelopment of the
site.
Ms. Stromberg stated Tri-Land Properties Inc. is requesting a rezoning for the Cub Foods/Fridley Liquor
site, located at 250 57t'' Avenue, from G3, General Shopping to PUD, Planned Unit Development. This
is the first Planned Unit Development rezoning the City of Fridley has seen since Bordeaux's
Springbrook Addition plat of 1961. That PUD is a single-family residential neighborhood on Fairmont
Circle, off of East River Road. Though those properties are zoned PUD, staff wouldn't consider that a
typical PUD development seen today.
Ms. Stromberg stated Planned Unit Developments typically are intended to achieve the following:
• Provide greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict application of the
zoning ordinance in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity.
• Encouraging a more creative and efficient approach to the use of the land.
• Encouraging the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural features
and open space.
Encouraging a development pattern that is consistent with land use density, transportation
facilities and community facilities objectives ofthe Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Stromberg stated the City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that
help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan
identifies that subject property to be within one of the "potential redevelopment areas." Those
redevelopment areas were developed based upon community input at neighborhood planning meetings
and staff recommendations. Redevelopment is a form of community revitalization that transforms
undesirable elements of a site into desirable elements that reflect the community's collective plan.
Approving this project through a PUD requires the petitioner to submit a"General Plan of Development"
which consists of maps, including phasing components, descriptive statements of objectives, principals
and standards used in the project. It also requires that any modification of the originally approved PUD,
be reviewed before the City Council which is similar to the process the City uses for master plan approval
on an S-2, Redevelopment project.
Ms. Stromberg stated the subject property is within the "Northstar Transit Oriented Development,
(TOD)" redevelopment area within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Redevelopment of this area would
provide several objectives highlighted within the Comprehensive Plan: Including the removal or
revitalization of older, blighted, or outdated buildings, providing an opportunity for more efficient land
uses, providing an opportunity to build new commercial buildings, create additional job opportunities,
strengthening tax base, and creating opportunities for new streetscape improvements.
Ms. Stromberg stated redevelopment of this site also accomplishes several of the goals identified
through the neighborhood meetings and the telephone survey for the Comprehensive Plan. Those goals
are to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable place to live" and to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable place to
invest in business." Ways identified to accomplish those goals were to create a walkable downtown area
(the Northstar TOD area was identified as the best place in Fridley for a walkable downtown, because of
its proximity to the train station), provide more retail opportunities (the community spoke loud and clear
about wanting more retail opportunities and the fact that they felt like several of our shopping areas were
in desperate need of redevelopment), provide more restaurants, and maintain current tax base and
encourage growth.
Ms. Stromberg stated as part of the process to allow a rezoning to a PUD, Planned Unit Development, it
is very important to establish guidelines that dictate what type of quality development will occur on the
site. Within those guidelines there are several elements that need to be discussed and agreed upon in the
General Plan of Development, in order to lead the developer and the City into an approved PUD. The
petitioner has hired Kathy Anderson of Architectural Consortium to help establish design criteria, which
will become an E�ibit of the General Plan for Development. Some of the details outlined in this
document are listed below:
• Building Orientation — site planning concept with multiple buildings on one site with a focus
inward as well as outward towards the public right-of-way and the importance of moving
buildings closer to the street.
• Building Design — discusses Building Mass and Fa�ade Design. Varying rooflines, adding the
use of canopies, and other accents to visually break-up walls.
• Building Materials — provides a list of acceptable building materials.
• Doors and Windows — encouraging windows on all sides of the building, etc.
• Screening — discusses screening loading docks, drive-thru's, and rooftops units with the use of
building materials, walls, landscaping
• Franchise Design — tenants are allowed to maintain their corporate identity but shall use similar
materials, chosen in the guidelines.
�
• Landscape and site treatment — creating common themes, landscaping used for screening,
planters, pots encouraged to be used along paved areas.
• Parking — the need to accommodate bicycle/motorcycle parking, create cross parking between
users, site plan shall allow for clear connections and movement for pedestrians and motorists
• Lighting — Uniform lighting throughout the site, with the use of ornamental lighting on the
buildings and in the parking lot.
• Flags — perimeter flag poles on the site to be key focal points
• Pedestrian connections — creating pedestrian linkage to all buildings on the site and to the public
sidewalk system, creation of outdoor seating areas, striping crosswalks
• Signage (Wall Signage and Free-standing) — to create consistency throughout the development
with architectural character, base on monuments made out of masonry, usage of awnings.
Ms. Stromberg stated the Architectural Design and Signage Guidelines becomes a critical part of a PUD
because that along with the drawn plans illustrates what the development would essentially look like and
what is and is not allowed. It becomes the "rules" for the site and any modification to those rules will
require an application for a new PUD.
Ms. Stromberg stated staff is not in complete agreement with everything provided in the Architectural
Design and Signage Guidelines and will be requiring that some modifications are made before it becomes
part of the General Plan for Development. Generally we want it to be clear in the document that a 4-sided
building needs to be constructed on all buildings within the development.
Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed redevelopment plan is risky since the only known future tenant at this
time is Cub Foods. It is important to note that this plan is based upon market assumptions that newly
developed spaces will fill according to the phased plan for redevelopment to bring the entire PUD to
completion. But, the developer seems confident enough to advance this proposal.
Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed redevelopment of the site will allow for the revitalization of both the
interior and exterior of the existing building. Though an addition will be constructed on the east side of
the building, 50 feet of the entire north wall of the existing building will be removed, therefore reducing
the square footage of the main building by approximately 21,000 square feet. The proposed site plan also
identifies 3 free-standing buildings, two on the north side of the property and one along the south edge of
the property. Those new buildings will be incorporated into the e�sting parcel and will not require
creation of lots of their own.
Ms. Stromberg stated staff suggested that the petitioner seek a potential rezoning to a PUD, instead of
seeking variances to the standard G3, General Shopping zoning district regulations. For example, the G
3 zoning code requires a front yard setback of 80 feet and a side yard setback on corner lots of 80 feet.
Since the subject property has streets on all sides of it, code would require an 80-foot setback for
buildings on all sides. Placement of the new buildings, closer to the street, would not meet that setback
requirement. Since the subject property is within the Northstar TOD district, staff would prefer to see
building brought closer to the street, to help create a downtown environment that provides a pedestrian
scale to the retail area.
Ms. Stromberg stated staff asked the petitioner to try to comply with the G3, General Shopping code
standards as much as possible, with the understanding that some of the requirements will not be able to be
met.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding the "front yard setback": Fridley City code requires that the shortest
street frontage be considered the front yard. In the case of the subject property, University Avenue would
7
be considered the front yard. The petitioner proposes to construct a new 14,000 square foot addition to
the east side of the existing building, which will be 35 feet from the front yard property line, therefore, not
meeting the code required 80-foot setback.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding the "side yard setback (north)": Because this property has street
frontage on all sides, an 80-foot side yard setback is required per G3 zoning regulations. The proposed
Retail A building is 15 feet from side yard property line and the Retail B building is 30 feet from the side
yard property line. As stated earlier, because this site is within our Northstar TOD, staff would like to see
the buildings brought closer to the street, as proposed. This helps create the idea of a"walkable
downtown", which adds to the existing streetscape along 57t'' Avenue, provides close connections for
pedestrians and bicyclists and it will conceal parking to the opposite side of the building.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding the "side yard setback (south)": Again, City Code would require an 80-
foot setback. Proposed Anchor B is 72 feet from the side yard properiy line and Anchor C is 55 feet from
the side yard property line. Street frontage on all sides of this property provides a great challenge when
trying to consider full build-out of the site.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding the "parking setback from a public right-of-way": The petitioner's site
plan shows as little as a 5-foot setback between the property line and the parking lot in locations along the
south, east and north properiy line. City Code requires a 20-foot parking setback from a public right-of-
way to allow an adequate separation between a particular use and the right-of-way. This area also serves
as space needed for sidewalks, landscaping, screening and snow storage. City staff is overall concerned
about the lack of green space on this site plan. Though the petitioner is meeting code requirements for the
amount of trees required to be planted, staff feels that there are parking stalls proposed that will never be
used and would be better utilized as green space. If additional green space can be added on this site and if
there is adequate room designated for snow storage, staff would be comfortable with the deficient parking
setback. The petitioner has since added green space along the southern property line.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding the "number of stalls." After receiving our staff report, the petitioner
removed some of their parking stalls to add green space. Their previous plan showed more parking stalls
then code would require. As a result, they are proposing 754 stalls, which is 21 stalls less than code
would require for full build-out of the site, however staff is comfortable with this because this is a PUD.
Ms. Stromberg stated City Code requires that parking stalls in our commercial districts be 10 feet wide
by 20 feet long if they are nose-to-nose stalls or 10 feet wide by 18 feet long if the stall abuts a curb.
Over the years, the City has had many requests by other commercial, educational, and medical type uses
to allow a smaller lot size. In some instances the City has allowed a reduction in the width of a stall for
those parking stalls that have a low customer turnover. For example: employees at a medical clinic or
students at a school.
Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner has submitted a study conducted by Metro Transportation Group
Inc., who is out of Hoffman Estate, Illinois. Their research is based on information obtained by The
Urban Land Institute, the National Parking Association and the Parking Consultants Council. Based on
their research moderate to higher turnover visitor parking, community retail and medical visitor spaces
can be accommodated with a parking stall size of 8-feet 9-inches to 9-inches 0-feet wide. Those
situations where turnover is less can be accommodated by a smaller stall. As a result, they conclude that
the stall size of 9-feet wide and 18-feet long for the proposed redevelopment is adequate.
Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner also completed a parking field analysis, demonstrating the difference
between a 9-foot by 18-foot stall and a 10-foot by 20-foot stall. Based on the square footage of the new
Cub Foods (65,177) and Retail A(10,500), which is one of the free-standing buildings on the north side
of the building, 262 stalls would be constructed at a stall size of 9 feet by 18 feet. Increasing the size of
the stall to a 10 ft. by 20 ft. stall would reduce the amount of stalls to 196, which is 66 less stalls.
According to the petitioner, the 9-foot by 18-foot stall is a necessity for them and for Cub Foods, in order
to make the project work.
Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner is showing a 24-foot drive aisle is some of the parking lots and 25
plus in others. Code requires a 25-foot drive aisle for two-way traffic. It is also important to point out
that the Fire Marshall requires a 25-foot drive aisle around the main building and Anchors B and C for
fire access and safety.
Ms. Stromberg stated staff understands how important parking is for Cub Foods and the petitioner and
with a PUD rezoning it does allow flexibility when designing a project. However, staff feels that some
requirements related to parking cannot be modified. As a result, staff is comfortable allowing the stall
size to be reduced to 9-feet wide, however, the stall length needs to be increased to the code required
20-fet long for nose to nose parking stalls and can be 18-feet long for those stalls that abut a curb. Staff
will also require that all drive aisles remain at 25-feet to help ensure the safety of the motoring public, and
customers walking on site and to provide clear fire access throughout the site.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding "landscape (tree count)": The petitioner is complying with the code-
required amount of trees that need to be planted on this site. However, they are deficient is meeting the
code required amount of coniferous trees. Code requires that 30 percent of the trees planted shall be
coniferous trees in order to continue to beautify the site in winter months and to potentially help with
screening. As a result, staff feels that it is necessary that the petitioner replace seven of the proposed
shade trees with coniferous trees.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding "signs (free-standing)": Originally the petitioner had submitted plans
showing seven free-standing signs on the site. They were proposing to place four signs along Interstate
694 and three along 57t'' Avenue, all of which would allow for multi-tenant shared signage. Staff
articulated to the petitioner very early in the application process that the amount of free-standing signage
proposed would not be supported by staf£ City code does allow one free-standing sign per street frontage
in our commercial zoning districts and a few years ago we adopted special language that would allow
larger signs to those properties that are within 275 ft. of Interstate 694. After several internal staff
discussions and site visits to other similar types of commercial developments, staff determined that we
would be comfortable allowing one free-standing sign per street frontage on this site. This property is
somewhat unique in the fact that there is frontage on all 4 sides. As a result, staff determined that it
would be acceptable to allow two 200 square foot and two 80 square foot free-standing signs on this
properiy. With a condition that one of the 80-square foot signs cannot be installed until Anchors B and
Anchor C on the south side of the properiy is developed. The petitioner is agreeable to this solution.
They are currently proposing to install one 200-square foot sign on the southwest corner (near Main Street
& I-694) and one 200-square foot sign near the westbound entrance ramp to I-694, and one 80-square foot
sign along 57th Avenue.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding "signs (wall signage)": City Code requires a specific formula for wall
signage. That requirement is 15 times the square root of the length of the wall. In the case of multi-
tenant buildings, staff's policy is to take the length of space a particular tenant leases and then take 15
times the square root of that leased space. In most situations, our Code allows more than adequate
signage. In the case of the smaller retail buildings, Retails A& B and Anchors B& C, City code wall
signage requirements will be met.
Ms. Stromberg stated wall signage on the main building, however, is over what Code would typically
allow. After many years of reviewing wall sign permits, staff has determined that when it comes to a
�
larger scale building with very long wall lengths, our formula can end up not allowing the sign to be
proportionate to the mass of the building. In 2004, Ashley Furniture requested variances to our wall sign
allotment to allow larger signs on the north, east and west sides of the building. The City Council granted
variances to allow signage up to two times larger than what Code would allow on the north and east walls.
This situation is similar to that of the Cub Foods building in that the large scale of the building requires
the need for greater signage. As a result, staff is comfortable allowing the signage proposed in the
architectural plans for the main building.
Mr. Hickok stated regarding "outdoor sales area": The petitioner is proposing to have (2) outdoor sales
areas that will be used 10-12 weeks out of the year. Cub Foods would primarily use this area for garden
sales in the spring and early summer. The areas that they have highlighted on their site plan will be 36
feet by 93 feet (3,348 square feet) in size and will be designed using decorative pavers on the surface.
The petitioner has created a"pergola" structure that will be installed during the 10-12 weeks sales period
and will be removed and returned to parking stalls at the conclusion of the sales period.
Mr. Hickok stated the petitioner has decided to move the outdoor sales area to the interior portions of the
parking lot for Cub Foods and Anchor A to alleviate any staff concerns.
Mr. Hickok stated the G3 zoning code allows garden centers or nurseries which require outside display
or storage of inerchandise with a special use permit. This site has received special use permits in the past
for garden centers, when the site was used as a Holiday Store. The most recent SUP for a garden center
issued on this site was in 1988, required the sales area be attached to the building, and only accessed
through the building and not the parking lot.
Mr. Hickok stated there are other properties within the City that have SUP's for garden centers. Some
examples of those are Bachman's, Home Depot, Wal-mart, and Menards. In all those situations, the City
required that the business construct a permanent structure attached to their building for their garden
centers as opposed to a free-standing tent type garden center often seen in other communities. In lieu of
constructing a permanent structure for garden sales, the petitioner and more importantly Cub Foods, is
requesting to have the outdoor sales area within the parking lot. Instead of simply putting up a tent, the
petitioner has designed a decorative paver area with a temporary pergola that will have cedar posts, and
maintenance free fencing. Cub Foods is a 24-hour operation, so they have expressed to staff that,
although the garden center will not be open 24 hours, they do have staff that will be on-hand to provide
security and theft control. Staff feels this solution is unlike what we have seen in other applications, but
would consider it acceptable considering it is a PUD zoning, which allows flexibility when designing a
proj ect.
Mr. Hickok stated regarding "public gathering area, patio area": The petitioner is proposing to construct
a public gathering area with Phases 2A-2B. This area will have an arbor constructed within it, with
seating and perimeter landscaping. This area has the potential of creating a nice environment for
employees who work on site or customers who shop on site. There is also a patio area planned for the
east side of Retail A, which will provide an outdoor seating option for a potential restaurant.
Mr. Hickok stated regarding "dumpster enclosure locations": City staff has been working with the
developer on developing preferred placement of dumpsters for the two most northern buildings along 57tn
Avenue. Staff would ideally prefer to see them incorporated into the building or attached to the building
in a way that hides them from the public right-of-way. The latest plans depict a dumpster enclosure for
Retail A attached to the monument sign and a dumpster enclosure at the south building wall setback from
Retail B. Both enclosures will be constructed of material comparable to the material used for the building
and will be surrounded with landscaping. Though this is not staff's ideal location for the dumpster
enclosures, through architecture, building materials, and landscaping these enclosures should essentially
blend into their surrounding environment.
10
Mr. Hickok stated regarding "multi-modal connections: Any redevelopment within the Northstar TOD
Redevelopment Area is expected to have clear connections for walkers and bikers, as well a vehicles.
This site is only '/2 mile from the Northstar train station, and there is a bus stop at the corner of University
Avenue and 57t'' Avenue. Staff has emphasized the importance of pedestrian connectivity to and
throughout this site to the petitioner throughout our discussions.
Mr. Hickok stated staff is currently in the process of developing a new ordinance that will be a Transit
Oriented Development overlay district for the areas surrounding the Northstar commuter rail station. The
Tri-land site is proposed to be included in the proposed TOD overlay district. The City plans to require
sidewalks and bike trails in this overlay district, which will allow people to get safely from mass transit
stops in the area to shopping and neighboring residential areas. Due to limited public funding, staff
anticipates cooperating with private property owners to create new multi-modal connections within
redevelopment projects.
Mr. Hickok stated as a result of discussions with staff, the petitioner has created some sidewalk
connections on their site. There are connections from 57t'' Avenue to Retail A and B on the north side of
the lot and connections on the west side of the lot to the main building and to Anchor B and C. They
have also created a main pedestrian walkway from the east side of Retail B, connecting to the main
building. They plan to raise the walkway with a barrier curb on each side to provide the protection for
pedestrians utilizing the walk. At the location where the walk actually crosses the drive aisle the raised
walk will transition or ramp back down to the elevation of the drive aisles. It is unforiunate though that
this connection is not planned to take place until Phase 3A. Staff would prefer for it to be constructed
sooner in the phasing process, if possible.
Mr. Hickok stated an important multi-modal connection that staff feels the petitioner is overlooking is a
connection from the bus stop at 57t'' and University and the new development proposed on the east end of
the site. It is likely that many employees of the retail center will be taking the bus to work It is not
realistic that a person walking or biking from the bus stop will travel west along 57t'' Avenue to the
walkway proposed into the site by Retail B if they are traveling to the Cub Store or the liquor store. They
will cut across the CVS parking lot, which poses risks because of their drive-thru traffic. Staff
recommends that the petitioner be required to explore the possibilities of an eastern access along the east
end of the CVS site or outside the MnDOT chain link fence to the northeast corner of the new eastern
building area.
Mr. Hickok stated regarding "truck traffic": The petitioner has submitted plans showing truck
circulation on the site. Staff has determined that it is very important to have a one-way movement on the
site that moves counter clock-wise around the main building. Trucks cannot stand and wait in the queuing
area between University Avenue and the CVS entrance. Nor do we want customers on this site having to
navigate around trucks from all directions.
Mr. Hickok stated regarding "phasing plan": A phasing plan needs to be provided to the City as a
requirement of a PUD. There will be a document like a development agreement that goes along with this
the Council will ultimately approve as part of the Planned Unit Development as well. When the new Cub
Foods store is being redeveloped as part of Phase 2A, 50 feet by 297 feet of the front of the building will
be removed to make the Cub Foods new entrance. The remaining 50 feet of the existing building is
shown in the plans to remain as is until Phase 3A. This is something that staff is not comfortable
allowing. We would recommend and will stipulate that the remaining 50 feet of the front of the building
be removed within 1 year of the opening of the new Cub Foods, which is a timeline determined after
recent discussions with the petitioner. Staff would also like to see more detailed phasing plans showing
11
when modifications will happen to the parking lot and when landscaping, signage and pedestrian
connections are proposed to be installed.
Mr. Hickok stated regarding "existing green space south of the e�sting main building": The
development of Anchor B and C is proposed to take place in the last phase of the overall project. This
space is currently green and staff will stipulate that it remain that way until which time it is developed
according to the proposed PUD site plan. Existing dilapidated parking lot light fixtures located near the
south green space will need to be removed within the first phase of this project.
Mr. Hickok stated the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan indicates that in 2005, the portion of University
Avenue adjacent to the existing Cub Foods/Fridley Liquor Store site carried 34,500 vehicles per day. At
this traffic level it is carrying 2,500 less vehicles per day than its ma�mum design capacity. Using the
State's range of 31,000 to 37,000 vehicle trips per day the roadway is within specifications to function at a
Level of Service (LOS) D. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan anticipates that University Avenue will be
carrying 44,100 vehicles per day by the year 2030, based upon increases in population for Fridley and
surrounding communities, as well as redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 44,100 vehicles
per day, University Avenue would be above its design capacity. This project may bring the roadway and
its intersection at 57th Avenue and University Avenue closer to capacity, earlier than anticipated. As a
result, the Minnesota Department of Transportation was asked to comment on the perceived or real
impacts of the development. To date, the City has not received their comments, but will place a
stipulation on the rezoning that if approved it will need to comply with any conditions set for by
MN/DOT.
Mr. Hickok stated since 57t'' Avenue and Main Street (south of 57t'' Avenue) are County roadways, the
City has also notified the County Highway Department of the proposed project and is awaiting their
comments. Again, staff will place a stipulation on this rezoning request that will require the petitioner to
comply with any conditions set forth by the County.
Mr. Hickok stated the petitioner had Westwood Professional Services, Inc. perform a traffic impact study
on the proposed project. The consultants conducted their study by analyzing traffic volumes, trip
generation, trip distribution, and they completed an operational analysis. The executive summary states
the following, "Fridley Market is located within an area of roadways that are fully analyzed, designed,
and constructed consistent with the projected future area traffic volumes. The last major construction in
this area was completed in 1998. At the present time the Fridley Market site has a 44,000 square foot
vacancy. If this vacancy were to be filled, the total traffic volumes in the area could be accommodated by
the surrounding roadway network with only a minor change in signal timing at one nearby intersection;
no lane additions or other physical roadway changes would be needed. Beyond filling of the current
vacant space, analyses were also conducted of the impact of traffic to be generated by the redevelopment
of the surrounding roadway network. The results indicate that the surrounding roadways are capable of
supporting the added traffic from site redevelopment at acceptable levels of service again through only
minor signal timing modifications at one intersection."
Mr. Hickok stated Westwood is suggesting that, although the intersection into the subject property and
the intersection at Main Street and 57t'' Avenue operate at a Level of Service A, the intersection at 57tn
Avenue and University Avenue currently operates at the LOS C and will operate at the LOS D or worse
after the redevelopment of this site. This level of service is based primarily on the northbound left turn
movement at this intersection. Westwood recommends that the mitigation measure used to restore
acceptable operations of this intersection is by optimization of the signal timing at the intersection.
Specifically, it is suggested that the green time for the northbound left movement be increased, with the
southbound through movement decreasing by a like amount to maintain a 160-second cycle length. With
12
this mitigation measure in place, the overall intersection LOS will improve to C. Staff has heard from
MnDOT and they are okay with this modification to the signal timing.
Mr. Hickok stated stormwater treatment concepts are shown on the plan, but a fully identified and
detailed stormwater plan will be completed for the entire site build-out. Similarly, utility plans have been
provided, but details and specifications are not completely provided as required for construction approval.
Also, no stormwater, erosion control, or utility phasing plans have been provided or reviewed. After
discussion with the petitioner yesterday, the engineer and the City Engineer will be getting together to
resolve these issues. We are confident those issues can be worked out after that discussion. It is a
situation is where the early pieces are probably fairly easy to design but some of those other later
developing pieces will happen in a chronological manner.
Mr. Hickok stated City staff recommends approval of the Rezoning ZOA # 10-01, with stipulations. The
rezoning accomplishes the following objectives:
Proposed use meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Provides added tax value to an underutilized retail site
• Provides additional job opportunities.
Ms. Stromberg stated staff recommends that if Rezoning, ZOA # 10-01 is approved, the following
stipulations be attached:
The property shall be developed in accordance to the General Plan for Development
Agreement, which will include the architectural plans dated and the Architectural
Design and Signage Guidelines dated .(This agreement shall be prepared by the
petitioner and approved by staff prior to City Council review of the rezoning request.)
2. The General Plan for Development Agreement must include a three-year time limit to
construction inactivity between phases until full build out of the site is complete as
proposed.
3. The property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan SP.1 dated
which will incorporate the stipulations included herein and approved by staf£ (Site plan
shall be revised per City staff comments included in staff report prior to City Council
review of the rezoning request.)
4. The building elevations and signage shall be constructed in accordance with architectural
plans , dated .(Architectural elevations shall be modified to
list every material to be used on each side of each of the building and architectural design
and signage guidelines shall be modified per City staff's request prior to City Council
review of the rezoning request.)
5. Phasing Plan shall be modified to show demolition of the entire 50 feet on the front of the
building to be completed � D�'zA within one vear of the openin� of the Cub Foods
store and the plans and shall be redone to show modification of parking areas and
installation of landscaping, signage and pedestrian connections.
6. The �� applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for each phase prior to
construction, including but not limited to building, land alteration, sign permits.
7. The proposed project and phasing shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA
requirements.
8. City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance
of building permits.
9. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building
permit. Any dead trees on the site will need to be replaced annually.
13
1 L �e�-e�� ^� r°��r�' �* *�m° Applicant of building permit applications, to pay all
water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit.
12. The subject properiy shall not be allowed to have telecommunication facilities or
billboards constructed on it.
13. Existing light poles and fixtures on the south side of the subject property shall be
removed during Phase 1 of the proposed project or by June 15, 2010, whichever comes
first.
14. Truck route serving all buildings proposed for site shall follow a one-way counter clock-
wise loop entering from west entrance of site and e�ting the east entrance of site; revised
site plan reflecting such change to be submitted for staff approval prior to second reading
of ordinance. No truck loading will be allowed on 57t'' Avenue.
15. All lighting shall be no more than 3-foot candles at the property line.
16. Site Plan must be redrawn to � relocate outdoor sale areas �r�' +� ,.. -,� +,��+
° �„+�'��r ��'° �r°� to a location off of an access drive aisle. Fence design around
the outdoor sales area shall be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a
building permit for Phase 2A. If the loss of parking or snow storage space resulting from
use of the outdoor sale area creates a parking shortage, the outdoor sale areas use must
remain solely for parking.
17. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be clearly delineated with colored striping or colored
pavement to accommodate safe pedestrian movement between the retail buildings.
18. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Anoka County
Highway Department.
19. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Minnesota Department
of Transportation.
20. No firework displays shall occur within the outdoor sales areas.
21. No fertilizer shall be stored outside.
22. Access to Holiday Station store and CVS Pharmacy shall be maintained during
construction.
23. Bike racks shall be provided on site per code requirements.
24. Design detail shall be provided for the main sidewalk running north and south in the
parking lot.
25. Specific areas shall be designated for snow storage and a plan shall be submitted showing
those areas, prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 1.
26.
.,
�c���te�:��e€—�y=�g�� �e� ���The petitioner shall submit a
comprehensive si�n plan to be attached to the General Plan for Development.
�+.,���ri,,,-+„ r;+� r,,,,r,.;i ,- „�+i,o ,- o�+
28. Applicant will have to provide a specific stormwater conveyance and treatment system
plan for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to construction
commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not been shown on
plans to date.
29. Applicant will have to provide a specific temporary and permanent erosion control plan
for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to construction
commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not been shown on
plans to date.
14
30. Access easements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment facilities,
and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley as approved
by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
3 L Maintenance agreements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment
facilities, and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley as
approved by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
32. As part of a maintenance agreement for the stormwater collection system, a permanent
SWPPP will be submitted for the site and approved by Engineering to include
consideration for treatment facility maintenance, minimization of contaminated runoff
from garden center areas, truck dock areas, snow storage areas, etc. This will be
provided prior to construction commencement.
33. Applicant will have to provide a specific utility plan for approval by Engineering for each
phase prior to construction commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that
have not been shown on plans to date. Note that inclusion of restaurants, cafes, or dining
areas of all types will require e�ternal grease traps approved by Engineering on
respective sanitary sewer discharge lines.
Ms. Stromberg stated regarding the change in Stipulation No. 6, using the word "applicant" instead of
"petitioner," Tri-Land is the petitioner but they might not be applying for the permit for Cub Foods, or
other proposed buildings on the site.
Commissioner Oquist asked whether No. 6 applies to all different phases, too? As people want to open
a shop of some sort, they apply for the permit?
Ms. Stromberg replied, yes, permits are required for each phase and Tri-Land would need to sign off on
the permit application.
Ms. Stromberg stated they are removing Stipulation No. 10 completely as the petitioner has articulated
to staff that the cross-parking agreements are highlighted in their lease agreement. So, there is no need
for them to file an actual easement. Staff will be getting a copy of that lease agreement from the
petitioner for the City's files.
Ms. Stromberg stated, regarding Stipulations No. 16, staff has agreed to allow 2 outdoor sales areas on
site, so long as they are moved in from the main drive aisle into the site, which the petitioner has agreed
to.
Ms. Stromberg stated, regarding Stipulation No. 26, they are removing it because since the report was
written, the petitioner has submitted a new site plan showing a new location for one of their free-standing
signs that was too close to the CVS sign. As a result, staff is changing the stipulation to simply require
that they submit a comprehensive sign plan, which is typical of all multi-tenant complexes in Fridley,
which will become part of the General Plan for Development.
Ms. Stromberg state, regarding Stipulation No27, staff is recommending it be removed, because the new
site plan submitted shows location of the cart corrals.
Mr. Hickok referred back to Stipulation No. 2, talking about the three years of inactivity. The developer
was concerned, and the Commission may be concerned, that from the start of their construction the site be
done within three years. In the PUD ordinance says that if there is inactivity for 36 months, the PUD
dies, and would come back for reconsideration. So, as long as there is sometime of work being done on
the site, without a period of inactivity for 36 months, the current plan would be in place.
15
Mr. Kondrick stated sometimes parking can be an issue on this site. Are they going to be able to find
places to park, not only at Cub, but at the other dining or shopping possibilities? Also, could there be any
provisions made to gain access to the building from the south to shop at Cub?
Mr. Hickok replied this plan actually increases the number of stalls that are on the site from the existing
site plan. Cub Foods and the developer would prefer they go to an 18-foot deep stall rather than a 20-foot
deep stall, which would allow them to gain more parking stalls. Also, if they were able to do a 24-foot
wide drive aisle rather than a 25-foot drive aisle, in some places they may be able to keep more. Retailers
like Cub Foods are very interested in having a good parking ratio. Four stalls typically per thousand is
what they would like to maintain. Depending on the size of the stall, they come very close to the desired
1 to 250 if they are able to have that shorter stall. That is something the Planning Commission will have
to decide.
Mr. Hickok stated also, there had been parking in the back of the building and the City had them take it
out and make it green because without the door on the back of the building, it will not get used. Unless
the petitioner added doors on the back on the building, parking does not happen. Folks do not walk
around to the back of the building. Also, from what they understand, retailers do not want them there for
security purposes.
Commissioner Oquist asked regarding the moving of the Cub store, taking the 50 feet off the front of the
building, will the exiting building still having the 50-foot extension, is that still going to be there during
that one year period? Will that look decent?
Mr. Hickok replied the phasing like this is a challenge, and it is interesting how the petitioner thought
through that and the logistics on it. Staff has have that very same question for them, and they have
assured staff that, as you stand at the front door of the new Cub Foods store and look west, you are going
to see a finished, albeit temporary, surface that encloses that 50 feet and then it will be enclosed across the
front. There is a sprinkler systems and heat inside, so they need to make sure those items will continue to
function. It will be finished in a way that allows them to protect the interior of their store, while they are
decommissioning the store for new tenant spaces. Then when they get to Phase 3A, then that 50 ft. comes
off, the walkway continues across the front, and becomes more of a finished look.
Commissioner Oquist asked what happens to the Fridley Liquor Store during that first phase?
Mr. Hickok replied, this is another part of the logistics that they really need to program. Access will still
need to be gained to the Liquor Store while they are constructing the new addition to the building which
will become the Liquor Store space. Once the addition is complete, the Liquor Store will move into their
new space and then Cub Foods will start demolishing and construction of their new space.
Commissioner Oquist stated they rebuild Fridley Liquor Store first and then make room.
Mr. Hickok replied, yes, they will build the addition to the existing building first for Fridley Liquors.
Commissioner Dunham stated there are going to be more parking spaces now in the new proposed plan;
but the square footage of the buildable spaces is bigger, too, is it not?
Mr. Hickok replied, the square footage of the building will basically be the same as it is today. A
addition is being constructed but 50 ft. of the front wall is coming off, which basically amount to the same
about of square footage being added that is coming off. However, the field of parking increases and it is
commensurate with the additional square foot dimensions. Cub Foods is one retailer which has a standard
16
requiring a certain amount of that parking for their facility and that is an improvement relative to their
65,000 square foot store.
Commissioner Dunham stated it seems like they are basing this all on Cub Foods which is a major
tenant, but it is only half of the main building?
Mr. Hickok replied, it is half of the main building. Each of those tenants will be roughly 65,000 square
feet in that larger building. Then the rest of course will be smaller retailers on the outside.
Commissioner Dunham stated what he is wondering is a lot of the thought process of what the parking
should be is based on Cub's analysis of what Cub needs and, if he is seeing it right, Cub takes up
significantly half of the development. You do not know what the rest of the tenants might need. What
about their standards?
Mr. Hickok replied, the petitioner has been extremely careful because selling the rest of the space
depends on having enough parking stalls. When they do not know who they are selling/leasing space to,
they know that selling that deal to banks, etc. requires they have parking that matches their needs. The
petitioner has thought through that, they know what the relationship of parking space to retail space is.
Commissioner Sielaff asked why are their buildings identified as Anchor B and C?
Mr. Hickok replied, they needed to differentiate tenant spaces, they do not know who those tenants will
be right now, so that is the way the petitioner chose to differentiate them.
Commissioner Sielaff said, but it is still retail.
Mr. Hickok replied, right.
Commissioner Sibel asked, do we have any encouragement from this use as far as building materials,
using green, or encouraging recycling?
Mr. Hickok replied, we do not require anything in the ordinance; and there would not be anything in the
PUD that would cause us to exert some sort of mandate to do it. But we wouldn't discourage it.
Chairperson Kondrick asked if they have any flexibility as to the types of materials they use on the
front of the buildings? Such as using brick, etc.
Ms. Stromberg replied, yes, we do. Those types of materials are actually highlighted in the architectural
guidelines in the Commission's packets. The types of materials used is also shown on the building
elevations. It was very important to staff that there is a list provided that requires types of materials to be
used on the buildings. Also, they wanted to make sure that each building was constructed as a four-sided
building and each side of the building looks nice.
Chairperson Kondrick asked whether staff has discussed that with the petitioner, and they are in
agreement with that?
Ms. Stromberg replied, yes.
Commissioner Velin stated his understanding is that Cub will be adjacent to the liquor store. Is that
going to be like a mall type where you are going to be able to walk inside or will you have to go outside
to go from Cub to the liquor store or vice versa?
17
Mr. Hickok replied, it will be an e�ternal entrance into each of the shops.
Commissioner Dunham asked Mr. Hickok, then are all those parking spots going to go to 9 ft wide?
Mr. Hickok replied, yes, their plan has them all at 9 feet.
Chairperson Kondrick asked whether anybody had any problems with that?
Commissioner Dunham asked, what is Target?
Mr. Hickok replied, 10 feet.
Chairperson Kondrick commented, cars are just getting smaller and that is the wave of the future. He
does not have a problem with 9-foot stalls.
Commissioner Velin commented, pick-up trucks are not small.
Chairperson Kondrick stated, pick-up trucks are not, he had not thought about that.
Mr. Hickok stated if they choose to make part of their recommendation that the 18-foot stall depth is
okay, then certainly that is something the petitioner is looking for.
Commissioner Sibel stated and they would be going from a 25 to 24-foot aisle. It is the aisles she has a
concern with.
Tim Keane, local development counsel with Tri-Land, stated the thoroughness of the staff report reflects
the extent of the working relationship they have had with City staff over the last many months. The
thorough conditions are also reflected to the extent of conversations and discussions they have had. They
respectfully request approval as recommended by City staff with the conditions and stipulations as noted.
Hugh Robinson, executive vice-president of Tri-Land Properties, stated they have owned the Cub
shopping center since 2006. They bought it with the idea they would redevelop it quite frankly much
along the lines they are showing right now. They have been in business for 32 years. All they really do is
buy existing shopping centers. They are currently in 7 states, they have 16 properties (about 2.6 million
square feet of shopping centers). Over their 32-year history, they have done redevelopment of
approximately 8 million square feet. Their background has been in food-drug. They tend to focus on
locations they feel have supermarket potential.
Mr. Robinson stated they own three shopping centers in the Minneapolis market, one of which was a
sister property to the Fridley Center, the Cub Foods in Burnsville. They anticipate doing a similar type of
redevelopment of that property in the future. Fridley has taken a priority with Cub to try and get it
redeveloped and so they really focused on this one to begin with. They finally have an agreement of
principal with Cub to do the plan reflected in the staff report, and the next step is to put the zoning in
place to complete an agreement with Fridley Liquors. He is working with Rick Pribyl now to try and
negotiate a deal to arrange for their relocation. There are a lot of things that have to come together, but
this is just a part of the process.
Chairperson Kondrick stated to Mr. Robinson he does not mean to insult him but things have happened
in the past couple of years whereby plans are made and money is not there. There are good intentions, but
:
things do not happen which are not even anyone's fault. He asked Mr. Robinson whether he feels
confident that their plans will come to fruition and that the dollars are there?
Mr. Robinson replied, that is a fair question. Two years ago he would have said without a doubt that
money is not the issue. Today money clearly is the issue. When you walk in with a new long-term lease
with Cub Foods, guaranteed by Super Valu, that has a lot of interest to a lot of lending institutions to
provide the debt capital needed to redevelop the shopping center. That does not mean that they will not
need to develop additional sources of equity. A question was asked earlier by one of the commission
members in terms of how big is this shopping center going to be. The first phase, forgetting about Phase
4 which is the land in the back of the shopping center, when they redevelop the shopping center it is going
to be exactly the same size as the current shopping center. It is going to be about 165,000 square feet.
You will have a 65,000 square foot Cub, a 65,000 foot anchor, the liquor store, and the two outlets. That
is going to total about the same square footage as e�sts on the site today. It will be totally reconfigured
have a lot more leasable. You have the small-shop retail rather than just having a big gigantic box. They
certainly hope the market will turn around in the next couple of years which will create some retail
activity; but they have a real good start by having the Cub and the Fridley Liquor Store as well. They
have a bank loan on it right now. Whether or not that bank will be interested once they put this whole
package together, he is skeptical; but they have to start somewhere. There are a variety of different
avenues. Right now they have a single asset LLC that owns the shopping center. They have he thinks
maybe $4-5 million worth of equity. They probably have 80 or 90 investors that are in the equity
component.
Commissioner Sielaff asked whether they do development or management?
Mr. Robinson replied, they do everything. They have the design team putting together the whole
package, and they will have construction people to actually execute the actual construction of the project.
They have their own in-house leasing people and their own management people. They manage and lease
every property that they own.
Commissioner Sielaff asked how long normally do they own these properties?
Mr. Robinson replied, it varies. They own one center in Chicago they have had an interest in since 1981.
That is probably the exception more than the rule. The shortest one they owned was in Roseville,
Minnesota, in 1989. They owned it for four months which is also the extreme. Most of their properties
they generally buy them with the idea they will own them for 10 years.
Commissioner Sielaff asked how far along are they with the other Minnesota properties in Blaine and
Burnsville?
Mr. Robinson replied, they are kind of stuck regarding the Blaine one. They do not have a good
business plan they have been able to implement at that particular property. He is not nearly as far along
on that one as he is on Fridley. Regarding the Burnsville property, that is probably going to happen in the
following year once they get Fridley done. And it is a matter of capital asset budgeting as far as Super
Valu is concerned. They have so many dollars they can spend. His understanding is this is probably the
only new deal that Cub is doing in the Twin Cities right now.
Commissioner Sielaff stated so they are further ahead on this project than the other two.
Mr. Robinson replied, yes, much further ahead. They actually have a 14-15 page letter of intent that has
been negotiated down to the very fine details on the deal with Cub.
19
Glenn Johnson, director of design architecture and engineering for Tri-Land Properties, stated when they
go into these projects they really look at them to put them in a condition that they would want to own
them. Oftentimes they find people in the industry that are building things and buying them to flip them
the next year. They always approach these projects as if they are going to have to take care of them.
They have every facet of the real estate business in-house. Their approach is always doing something of
the right quality.
Chairperson Kondrick asked about the stipulations and the changes/omissions. He asked Mr. Johnson
if he has had a chance to look at those?
Mr. Johnson replied, he has.
Chairperson Kondrick asked if he concurs with them and understands them?
Mr. Johnson replied, he does, and they have been working with staff over the last several months. They
have had several meetings with the entire Planning staff, the Fire Marshall, engineering, down to their
housing authority people; and they have all had a different thought about what needs to happen here. They
have brought across to them that some of the things they see in the Comprehensive Plan for a transit-
oriented overlay district and how this site is important to those elements as to what the City is trying to
create down there. The site has a lot of potential, has a lot of interesting challenges to it; such as, high
visibility and how you make it and work with that, and all the routes nearby.
Mr. Johnson stated they received the stipulations last week and had a conversation with staff on every
one of them. He thinks they were comfortable with the requirements that are being placed upon them.
There are still some things they have to work through, details they have to bring across, some elements
they have thought through and explained; but they want to show in proof form. For example, how
phasing will work. There are things they see as part of the process of understanding how this will work
and integrate.
Commissioner Dunham stated he likes what they are doing and that corner needs it. He asked, however,
if they have the 9-foot stalls on their other sites and do they seem to be okay? Also, what about the count
of stalls and the ratios?
Mr. Johnson replied, they spent a lot of time on parking because, again in a retail shopping environment,
you get all different impressions about how parking should be. Parking to him is one of the most
important things. It has to be the right parking spaces in the right spots, the right number of them, so the
shopping center is successful. Absent those things you could be setting up failure. Staff has explained to
them how parking has typically been handled in the community. In direct response the parking spaces
they are proposing here are characteristic of what they do everywhere in the country. In some cases some
communities tell them they want smaller parking spaces. In terms of responding to questions staff had
proposed to them, they have consulted with their traffic engineers, Westwood, and also an international
transportation firm, Metro Transportation, with whom they often work and consult. Metro has offered the
letter indicating in terms of analysis they went to several different sources to review, for example, Urban
Land Institute, how do they see parking and it is based on a number of characteristics. You do not
necessarily find there is any body of evidence that says every parking space should be 15 feet or that it
should be 20 feet. What you find is that it is an engineering solution because in some cases parking
spaces may be shorter and the aisles wider.
Mr. Johnson stated they find that 9-foot by 18-foot stalls are very common. In Overland Park, Kansas,
they just finished a plan that is under construction now where they wanted the spaces to be smaller
because they recognize that vehicles are typically getting smaller. In fact in a parking space where you
20
would have an overhang with a curb, they would want to do a 17.5 or 16.5-foot space. Really what they
are doing is reducing the paved area. They find that allows them to take that paved area and put it into
something else. For example, on Retail buildings A and B, in those parking spaces across the front of the
building, if they were to have shorter spaces, what they would do is make a larger sidewalk area. They
have sidewalk landscape beds built into the area in front of the entrances to those stores. Those beds
would get larger. One of the things they have been doing in discussions with staff is really considering
how they can balance the request of staff with making the plan work. They spent a lot of time with Cub
talking about how this thing can come about. This is a very important market to them. Parking is
important. Finding a space that is appro�mate to the front and you do not have to walk a mile, all those
things are significant. What they have worked with Cub is they would prefer larger spaces. They would
probably prefer a little bit higher parking ratio. However, what they have done in this site they have
worked it so they recognize that the parking that is in front of their store is just part of the parking that
really serves these two anchors. Satisfying the needs of the tenant to them is first.
Mr. Johnson stated they have looked at a couple of alternatives as staff has brought to their attention the
importance of having a 25-foot aisle. What they have looked at is trying to find a way that they could
incorporate staff needs and not give up parking. They did examine if you had 10-foot by 20-foot parking
stalls and really this project does not move forward. That is a very significant event. They are trying to
find a way to satisfy all of these things at one time. What they found is staff is interested in having 25-
foot aisles throughout the site in the parking aisles as well as the major aisles around the property. What
they have done is have larger parking drive aisles coming in on the major entrance. Across the middle
entrance they have aligned it with the main drive aisle and made it much wider than the 25-feet. They
feel that is important as people are coming into the site, that is a major access point. However, they found
if they borrowed a foot from each of these drive aisles, more or less, they can increase the drive aisle
between those parking trees to 25 feet; and they do not lose any parking. That to him is an important
reallocation. If people feel they want a larger drive aisle, he thinks that can be accommodated.
Commissioner Velin asked when are they going to start?
Mr. Johnson stated a significant event is completing the deal with Cub and the deal with Fridley Liquors.
A project like this it is very important that when you start moving it keeps moving. Starting with the
Fridley Liquors relocation, they would like to start with this spring's construction season. They are
working with some contractors in town. The architect of record on this project, Architectural Consortium,
does a lot of retail work and she has brought a tremendous boom to this team by helping to bring a local
focus as well as a great deal of experience in shopping centers. MFRA has engineered this site to the
level necessary for the PUD and then some. They will be meeting with Fridley's engineer shortly to go
through that and make sure they are on the right track as to how this is going to work It is necessary
because as a phase project you have to think about how each phase works.
Mr. Johnson stated Fridley Liquors will continue to function while they are building. They have an
entrance on the side and into the mall but in building this building there will be some interruptions but
constructing the building on the east side will probably take the better part of the first year. When the
building is finished, Fridley Liquors will close one night and the next morning they will open a new store
or something like that. Upon that Cub will be able to relocate their interior demising wall, build a new
interior wall, and then start building under roof already, inside a box already existing.
Mr. Johnson stated the two dock areas are screened with walls. In fact the dock across the top of Cub is
under roof, completely behind a wall, the trucks pull into the building so it is an important view from
University and the Interstate. What they will see is doors and the loading area for the Liquor stores and
the adjacent shops, the truck is largely concealed inside an open-ended building but it has a roof and walls
on it. That is the first thing people see when they are coming down that ramp.
21
Mr. Johnson stated you will also have storefront that faces out to University with signage which is a very
nice effect. While they are working on the Cub building, at some point, they will want to tear off the
north end of the building about where the cut line will be, and they will construct their new front wall and
the site work that is brought in to create a new cruise lane on the front of the building. They will need to
talk to Cub about the pedestrian connection, but it looks like to him they can make it so it is available
sooner than this building. He thinks they will be able to establish the pedestrian connection very close to
the time that Cub would open. They will want to continue to have convenient parking for them while
they are operating in the old store.
Chairperson Kondrick asked what is going to happen with the McDonald's drive-thru restaurant?
Mr. Johnson replied, while they would like to continue to have the income, there will come a point
where it just does not work with what Cub wants to do in their continuing operation for their new store
and it will go away. They have had discussions with McDonald's about finding another location in the
shopping center, and they are still working with them on that.
Commissioner Sielaff asked about the timing, as the developers they need to complete a certain phase.
What happens if there is inactivity within a phase?
Mr. Hickok replied, he would suspect with the multitude of things happening on this site, it would be
rare to find that 36-month segment where there is no activity at all. There will be decommissioning of
stores, working on a new Retail A. That stipulation is in there and he thinks that evident that you do not
want to approve a planning unit development and not have it go anywhere. They would at a minimum
request an extension to that segment of the Code.
Commissioner Sielaff stated he guessed his concern would be that he would not know when inactivity
would start or end and if occurs somewhere within a phase or between a phase. How many inactivity
periods are we talking about? Could this be drawn out for years and years?
Mr. Hickok stated it does highlight something that is not only difficult with the way it is worded but also
that section of the Building Code that talks about 120 days of inactivity. This seeks to avoid that situation
where there is nothing, the planning and development is approved, and there is just nothing happening.
Whether there is, for example, an interior kitchen detail for Retail A, during that 36-month period they
could probably talk to the building inspection department but at no point could there be a dry spe1L If
they get themselves into that situation where there is 30 months of inactivity and there is something
around the corner, they need to communicate that to Council and it will be their discretion at that point if
they want to bring them back at 36 months or grant an extension.
Commissioner Oquist asked whether this PUD encompass all of this building activity? Let's say at
some point they decide for one reason or another, they do not want to do the south property? Then what
happens?
Mr. Hickok replied, the planning and development is what they are seeing here. Once it is approved it is
this series of building and the phasing and development plan that would be approved by CounciL If they
want to modify that there is, just like in our S-2, the closest type of zoning, they would come back for a
master plan amendment. It is almost an identical process. If they decide they are doing something
different back there, they would amend that through a formal process.
Commissioner Oquist asked, would that need to be within that three-year period?
22
Mr. Hickok replied, yes. It is conceivable, say they get through Phase 3A-3B, and they are moving onto
Phase 4 which slows them down a bit and they are approaching that three-year period, he is guessing they
will communicate to the City before they get to the three years. If at some point they say they are looking
at some other development alternatives, we will need to start talking about that amendment process.
Commissioner Oquist asked Mr. Johnson regarding the building where Cub is now, say they are not able
to find somebody to take over that 65,000 square feet, and they will have to divide that space, is that
allowed within this PUD?
Mr. Johnson replied, regarding the 65,000 square feet, they contemplated it could potentially be two
tenants. It is a large space and they are limited.
Mr. Hickok stated it would be allowed without modifying the footprint.
Commissioner Dunham asked Mr. Johnson what kinds of tenants do they visualize in Anchors B and C?
Retail A and B?
Mr. Johnson replied, Retail A and B he would see small convenience type tenants. What they have done
there is kind of create a more communal parking lot. They really share the back side of the parking.
Maybe somebody who would have outdoor seating.
Commissioner Oquist asked whether this has to be all retail? What if somebody wanted to put in a
cabinet shop back on Anchor C?
Mr. Hickok replied, as long as it is permitted in this commercial district, this is considered a Commercial
PUD and the spectrum of commercial uses that you would find in a G1, G2, or G3 is what we would
expect that spectrum to include. He is guessing that the square foot price typically would prohibit
something like a cabinet shop.
Mr. Johnson stated Retail B is very similar. It could be broken up into smaller tenants. Anchor C is
actually a footprint for an anchor which they think would be a very good candidate for this time of
location, high visibility from the interstate, some tenants that size really look for that.
Commissioner Sielaff asked what is an example of a tenant?
Mr. Johnson replied, it might be an office supply store. That is a familiar footprint right there. And
Anchor B is a space that they are shaping up, it is a vestibule for what has to happen there; but it has all
the other issues solved. It might be a retailer that likes the proximity of being on that site. It has
servicing, parking, it has all of those components. While they show it as one anchor, it could end up
being two anchors, depending on the footprint.
Commissioner Oquist asked could it be a restaurant?
Mr. Johnson stated they saw that area as being a location, aside from some 30,000 square feet that would
be in that Phase 4 area, they did see that potentially the same visibility from the interstate would be
desirable that is more of a destination. Potentially a free-standing restaurant.
Mr. Johnson stated regarding other concerns of the Commission, cars are getting smaller, they see it that
way as well, and they have worked with staff to protect that parking for Cub and the future Anchor A use.
As to how it would look in the interim, this is a common condition on the shopping centers they
redevelop, and they are concerned about how that looks, too. When you consider they want the space to
23
be attractive and draw attention so people, so they would like to put their store there. It is an all-weather
wall on the north side of the building, providing the flexibility for how the fa�ade might be configured
differently and some sort of graphic treatments helping people appreciate how it might look. A number of
things they have discussed. They have had some conversations with staff about this, too. For them it is
an operating shopping center so they want it to look good also.
Mr. Johnson stated regarding green efforts, they look at this as one of the greenest things you can do.
Take an existing building and recycle it. They keep as much as they possibly can. Some projects they do
institute recycling measures. They can talk to staff about how those haue worked out, but it is surprising
how you can put a little pressure on a contractor to recycle wood, metal, etc. and it can make a difference.
They find oftentimes in the building industry especially there are a lot of ways, but there is also a lot of
recycling.
Terry Rath, general manager of the Holiday station, stated he has a couple of concerns. Regarding the
entrance ne�t to Retail B, coming into their parking lot. He asked if that is going to be widened out or
anything because they get a lot of truck traffic in there during the day. Also, the street itself, by putting
up Retail A and Retail B it is hard to see because of the direction of the hill that comes up there compared
to where it is flat between Retail A and Retail B. He is afraid there might be a lot of possible accidents
occurring there because you cannot see around that corner. They have a lot of trucks coming in and going
out. In the wintertime it is very hard to get up that hill.
Mr. Hickok replied the County is still reviewing this. This segment of 57t'' is a county road. Back in
1998 when the reconstruction of this segment of the road occurred they were quite involved with the
access, not only locations but dimensions of the driveways. If a widening were to occur, not that it is out
of the question, staff will have that discussion with them. Frankly he does think it is a standard
dimension. As Mr. Rath said there are some grade issues in there, but it is a standard width dimension
and it is a shared access point. When they platted this originally, Holiday owned the large site and the
smaller site and they were okay with the shared access and the dimension of that access way at that point.
Staff has talked to the petitioners about what they call the "view triangle." The petitioners have been
careful to pull back the visibility around that corner as it is essential to safely pull out there. Even on the
illustration the landscape has been pulled back, there is not anything on the corner, and there is no
monument sign on that corner. You are dealing with a bit of a grade there, and you want to keep it open
so you can see what is coming from that direction and they try to do that in their landscape plan. Staff has
not heard back the final, official word from the County on 57t''. There is not a lot of room there if they
were to widen it out.
Chairperson Kondrick stated that is not up to the discretion of the petitioner?
Mr. Hickok replied, it really is not. He would like to say that they have more latitude in that also, but it
is a County road and they were very specific on the design. They have an access restriction all along
Main Street. It was a lot of work to figure out 57t''. We used to have many driveways in that short
segment at one time which was very dangerous. Now they are very pleased it is lined up with three
access points, and he thinks the County will be reluctant to make modifications there frankly.
MOTION by Commissioner Dunham to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 9:16
P.M.
24
Commissioner Oquist stated it looks to him that is very well thought out. Both parties have really
worked together to get this thing going. We need to clean that corner up. It looks to him that if it goes
through it will be a nice project.
Commissioner Dunham commented we are fortunate to have them investing there.
Chairperson Kondrick stated he agreed.
Commissioner Velin stated he thinks it will be a great improvement over what we have now.
Mr. Keane stated except for the presentation today they have not seen the modifications to the
stipulations. He asked if they could look at Stipulation No. 10?
Ms. Stromberg stated the City is just looking for a copy of the lease agreement they discussed yesterday.
Mr. Hickok stated it does not even need to be the executed agreement but the language so staff can put it
in a file and describe how it works for cross parking.
Mr. Keane asked regarding Stipulation No. 3, "Site plan shall be revised per City staff comments
included in staff report prior to City Council review of the rezoning request." He asked whether they are
moving forward with the site plan that is in front of the Planning Commission this evening?
Mr. Hickok replied the one thing that he would like to point out regarding the colored site plan is that the
site plan cannot include a reference to "outlot" nor can it be defined by property lines. But for that the site
plan is correct. It has had the word "outlot" removed but it does show the equivalent of property lines
around the outlot area south of the building, and we do not want that. We want to be clear there is no
separation of land here. There is no plat through the PUD process that is being defined.
Mr. Keane replied, that is clearly understood by the applicant.
Mr. Keane asked regarding the dimensions of the parking stalls and the drive aisles are what will be
recommended for approval and are moving forward?
Mr. Hickok stated if the Planning Commission approves the site plan, that would be a 9-foot by 18-foot
stall.
Chairperson Kondrick stated he agrees with that. Does anybody have a problem with that? He thinks it
is necessary and it is "today."
Commissioner Oquist replied, he has no problem.
MOTION by Commissioner Oquist approving Rezoning ZOA #10-01, by Tri-Land Properties, Inc., to
rezone from G3, General Shopping to PUD (Planned Unit Development) Zoning, for the redevelopment
of the site, legally described as Holiday North Second Addition, generally located at 244, 246, 248, and
250 — 57th Avenue NE with the following stipulations:
1. The property shall be developed in accordance to the General Plan for Development
Agreement, which will include the architectural plans dated and the Architectural
Design and Signage Guidelines dated .(This agreement shall be prepared by the
petitioner and approved by staff prior to City Council review of the rezoning request.)
25
2. The General Plan for Development Agreement must include a three-year time limit to
construction inactivity between phases until full build out of the site is complete as
proposed.
3. The property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan SP.1 dated
which will incorporate the stipulations included herein and approved by staf£ (Site plan
shall be revised per City staff comments included in staff report prior to City Council
review of the rezoning request.)
4. The building elevations and signage shall be constructed in accordance with architectural
plans , dated .(Architectural elevations shall be modified to
list every material to be used on each side of each of the building and architectural design
and signage guidelines shall be modified per City staff's request prior to City Council
review of the rezoning request.)
5. Phasing Plan shall be modified to show demolition of the entire 50 feet on the front of the
building to be completed within one year of the opening of the Cub Foods store and the
plans shall also be redone to show modification of parking areas and installation of
landscaping, signage and pedestrian connections.
6. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for each phase prior to construction,
including but not limited to building, land alteration, sign permits.
7. The proposed project and phasing shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA
requirements.
8. City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to issuance
of building permits.
9. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of building
permit. Any dead trees on the site will need to be replaced annually.
10. Applicant of building permit applications, to pay all water and sewer connection fees
prior to issuance of a building permit.
11. The subject properiy shall not be allowed to have telecommunication facilities or
billboards constructed on it.
12. Existing light poles and fixtures on the south side of the subject property shall be
removed during Phase 1 of the proposed project or by June 15, 2010, whichever comes
first.
13. Truck route serving all buildings proposed for site shall follow a one-way counter clock-
wise loop entering from west entrance of site and e�ting the east entrance of site; revised
site plan reflecting such change to be submitted for staff approval prior to second reading
of ordinance. No truck loading will be allowed on 57t'' Avenue.
14. All lighting shall be no more than 3-foot candles at the property line.
15. Site Plan must be redrawn to relocate outdoor sale areas to a location off of an access
drive aisle. Fence design around the outdoor sales area shall be reviewed and approved
by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 2A. If the loss of parking or
snow storage space resulting from use of the outdoor sale area creates a parking shortage,
the outdoor sale areas use must remain solely for parking.
16. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be clearly delineated with colored striping or colored
pavement to accommodate safe pedestrian movement between the retail buildings.
17. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Anoka County
Highway Department.
18. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Minnesota Department
of Transportation.
19. No firework displays shall occur within the outdoor sales areas.
20. No fertilizer shall be stored outside.
26
21. Access to Holiday Station store and CVS Pharmacy shall be maintained during
construction.
22. Bike racks shall be provided on site per code requirements.
23. Design detail shall be provided for the main sidewalk running north and south in the
parking lot.
24. Specific areas shall be designated for snow storage and a plan shall be submitted showing
those areas, prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 1.
25. Petitioner shall submit a comprehensive sign plan to be attached to the General Plan for
Development.
26. Applicant will have to provide a specific stormwater conveyance and treatment system
plan for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to construction
commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not been shown on
plans to date.
27. Applicant will have to provide a specific temporary and permanent erosion control plan
for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to construction
commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not been shown on
plans to date.
28. Access easements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment facilities,
and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley as approved
by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
29. Maintenance agreements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment
facilities, and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley as
approved by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
30. As part of a maintenance agreement for the stormwater collection system, a permanent
SWPPP will be submitted for the site and approved by Engineering to include
consideration for treatment facility maintenance, minimization of contaminated runoff
from garden center areas, truck dock areas, snow storage areas, etc. This will be
provided prior to construction commencement.
31. Applicant will have to provide a specific utility plan for approval by Engineering for each
phase prior to construction commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that
have not been shown on plans to date. Note that inclusion of restaurants, cafes, or dining
areas of all types will require e�ternal grease traps approved by Engineering on
respective sanitary sewer discharge lines.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. Receive the Minutes of the December 8, 2009, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission
Meeting.
MOTION by Commissioner Velin to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Sibel.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Receive the Minutes of the December 3, 2009, Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Commission Meeting.
MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Sibel.
27
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. Receive the Minutes of the October 5, 2009, Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting.
MOTION by Commissioner Sibel to receive the Minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Dunham.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
OTHER BUSINESS:
ADJOURN
MOTION by Commissioner Velin adjourning the meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist.
UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:25 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Denise M. Johnson
Recording Secretary
:
�
�
CfTY OF
FRIaLE7
Date
To
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
February 1, 2010
Wlliam Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Manager
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: Resolution Approving Special Use Permit Request, SP #09-19, Schmit Towing
INTRODUCTION
The petitioner, Ms. Schmit, is seeking a text
amendment to add language to the M-1, Light
Industrial zoning district; that would allow towing
services by issuance of a special use permit.
If the second reading of the ordinance to
approve the text amendment is approved, the
petitioner is also seeking a special use permit to
allow a towing services use at their property
which is located at 92 43�d Avenue.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT REVIEW
Contingent upon the approval of the text
amendment to allow a"towing services" as a
special use in the M-1, Light Industrial zoning
district; the petitioner is also seeking a special
use permit to allow this type of use to be
conforming and located at 92 43�d Avenue. The
existing property is 86,525 square feet (1.99
acres) and the existing building is 8,234 square
feet. Since the petitioner purchased the property
in 2006, they have made many improvements to
the site. They received a land alteration permit
to pave, curb and gutter a portion of the rear of
the lot to allow proper vehicle storage. They also
removed debris that was left from the previous
owner, painted the building and installed new
signage. The interior of the building is used for
office space, light vehicle maintenance and
storage of vehicles.
As part of the approval of the special use permit, the petitioner needs to meet the conditions set
forth in the proposed ordinance language. Staff has determined that the petitioner's request
meets the standards that are noted below, and how they plan to meet those conditions is
highlighted below in italics and bold.
(a) The storage aspect of said towing service operation shall be secondary, in terms of use,
to a principal building that houses a towing office, repair/maintenance facility for towing
fleet, and an interior storage area for a portion of the impounded collection of vehicles.
The existing building is the used for office (dispatch), storage of vehicles and for
light maintenance of the towing vehicles. The storage of the towed vehicles is
considered secondary to the principal use (building) of the property.
(b) The towing service site shall be located on a street with traffic volumes of less than
1,500 ADT (average daily trips). 43'd Avenue only averages approximately 900 trips
per day. The reason for this condition is that allowing this type of use on a road
that has limited daily trips, eliminates the potential for vehicle conflict between
typical traffic and large commercial towing vehicles. Towing certain vehicles may
require maneuvering in the street that could disrupt normal vehicle traffic.
(c) No storage of impounded or other vehicles associated with towing service business shall
be parked on street(s) adjacent to towing service facility. The petitioner has stated
that they currently don't allow vehicles of any type to be parked on the street, so
they have no problem complying with this condition. This would be monitored
yearly by staff.
(d) All storage shall be located in the side or rear yard of the towing service facility. Storage
of towed vehicles is already being done in the side or rear yard. The business
trailers that are currently in the front parking lot will be moved to the rear yard.
(e) All areas where vehicles are to be driven, towed or parked shall be surfaced with either
asphalt or concrete and those parking areas shall have concrete curb and gutter of B6-
12 standard or a suitable alternative, approved by the City Engineer, surrounding their
perimeter. Already completed on this site.
(� Areas where stored vehicles are intended to be parked shall be fenced, screened and
adequately lit from sunset to sunrise for security purposes. Lighting shall only include
shielded downcast fixtures. The area where vehicles are currently being stored is
already fenced in. The petitioner does plan to add an additional fence this spring
between the east side of the building and the east property line, for additional
security purposes. The site is screened through the use of existing landscaping.
Existing lighting on the site is shielded with downcast fintures.
(g) Parking stalls intended for storage of towed vehicles and towing truck fleet shall be
separated from those required by Code for customers and employees. Employee and
customer stalls can be in the side yard or front yard, but shall not be within the fenced
area intended for towed or impounded vehicles, or the towing fleet. The site meets
code requirements for parking and the rest of this condition is already being met.
(h) No intercom system shall be used in the open yard area if the edge of the yard is 250
feet or less from an existing residential dwelling in existence at the time of this permiYs
approval. Petitioner has read and agrees with this condition.
(i) No crushing, dismantling, or salvage of vehicles shall occur on the subject property.
This is something that the petitioner is totally agreeab/e to, but will be required to
be monitored by staff yearly.
(j) All towing operations whose storage yard is within 250 feet of a residential dwelling at
the time of issuance of the special use permit, shall be required to have limited hours of
yard operation, similar to the City's hours of power tool use and construction, which are:
7:00 AM to 9:00 PM Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM Saturday. The nearest
residential property is 660 feet from the subject property.
(k) Towing services shall not be located within a multi-tenant industrial complex. The
subject property has a free-standing building.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At the December 16, 2009, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for SP
#09-19. After a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of SP #09-
19, with the stipulations as presented.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission and further recommends
approval of the attached resolution, which includes the following stipulations:
STIPULATIONS
1. The petitioner shall comply with all the conditions set forth within the M-1 zoning district
code standards for a towing service business.
2. The petitioner shall verify free-standing sign location, ensuring that iYs 10 ft. from the
property line and obtain a sign permit for the existing sign.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP# 09-19
FOR SCHMIT TOWING, 92 43� AVENUE NE
WHEREAS, Section 205.25.O1.C.14 of Fridley City Code allows towing services in an M-1, Light
Industrial zoning district by a special use permit if certain conditions can be met; and
WHEREAS, on December 16, 2009, the Fridley Planning Commission held a public hearing to
consider a request by Schmit Towing, generally located at 92 43rd Avenue NE in Fridley, legal
description attached in Exhibit B, for a special use permit SP# 09-19 for towing services; and
WHEREAS, on February 8, 2010, the Fridley City Council approved the stipulations represented in
Exhibit A to this resolution as the conditions approved by the City Council on special use permit
SP# 09-19; and
WHEREAS, the petitioner, Schmit Towing, was presented with Exhibit A, the stipulations for SP#
09-19, at the February 8, 2010 City Council meeting;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Fridley that the
Special Use Permit SP# 09-19 and stipulations represented in Exhibit A are hereby adopted by City
Council of the City of Fridley.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS gtn
DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010.
SCOTT LUND — MAYOR
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
EXHIBIT A
SP# 09-19 Special Use Permit for Towing Services
Schmit Towing, 92 43"d Avenue NE, Fridley, MN
Stipulations
1. The petitioner shall comply with all the conditions set forth within the M-1 zoning district code
standards for a towing service business.
2. The petitioner shall verify free-standing sign location, ensuring that it's 10 ft. from the property
line and obtain a sign permit for the existing sign.
EXHIBIT B
SP# 09-13 Special Use Permit for Limited Outdoor Storage
HB Fuller, 5220 Main Street NE, Fridley, MN
That part of Lot Six (6), Auditor's Subdivision No. 39, according to the plat on file and of record in
the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Anoka County, described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the north line of said Lot Six (6) two hundred (200) feet east of the
northwest corner of said Lot; thence east along the north line of said lot two hundred (200) feet;
thence south along a line parallel with the west line of said Lot Six (6) to the south line of said Lot;
thence west along the south line of said Lot two hundred (200) feet; thence north along a line
parallel with the west line of said lot to the point of beginning.
Anoka County, Minnesota
Torrens Property
Torrens Certificate No. 102810
�
�
CfTY OF
FRIaLE7
Date
To
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
February 1, 2010
Wlliam Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Manager
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: Resolution Approving Special Use Permit Request, SP #10-01, Collins Electrical
Systems, for Holiday Companies at 7295 University Avenue
INTRODUCTION
The petitioner, Collins Electrical Systems, who is
representing Holiday Companies, is requesting a special
use permit to allow an electronic gas pricing sign and an
electronic reader board to replace the manual existing gas
pricing and reader board on the existing pylon sign at the
Holiday Gas Station/Taco Bell which is located at 7295
University Avenue.
A 70 sq. ft. free-standing sign already exists on the
subject property. The petitioner is planning to remove the
existing manual gas pricing sign and manual reader board
sign and replace them with electronic LED signs. The
installation of the two electronic signs will bring the total
sign area to 80 sq. ft.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At the January 20, 2010, Planning Commission meeting,
a public hearing was held for SP #10-01. After a brief
discussion, the Planning Commission recommended
approval of SP #10-01, with the stipulations as presented.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning
Commission and approval of the attached resolution,
including the following stipulations:
STIPULATIONS
1. Petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to installing any
signage on site.
2. Message on L.E.D. sign shall not change more often than authorized under Section
214.07 of the Fridley City Code.
3. Message on L.E.D. sign shall never flash or have motion that may distract vehicular
traffic in the area.
City of Fridley Land Use Application
SP #10-01 January 20, 2010
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
Collins Electrical Systems
4990 N. Hwy 169
New Hope MN 55428
Requested Action:
Special Use Permit for an automatic
changeable sign
Purpose:
To replace existing manual reader board
and gas pricing sign with an electronic
reader board signs.
Existing Zoning:
C-2 (General Business)
Location:
7295 University Avenue
Size:
103,883 sq. ft. 2.38 acres
Existing Land Use:
Gasoline Station Store
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
N: Multi-Family & Single Family & R-2 &
R-1
E: Industrial & M-2
S: Industrial & M-2
W: University Ave. & ROW
Comprehensive Plan Conformance:
Consistent with Plan
Zoning Ordinance Conformance:
Section 214.07 of the City of Fridley sign
code requires a special use permit for an
automatic changeable sign.
Zoning History:
Lot hasn't been platted.
1997 — Property rezoned from M-2 to C-2
1998 — Special Use Permit granted to allow
an automobile service station
1998 — Building & car wash building
constructed.
1998 — Pylon sign constructed.
2002 — Pylon sign refaced.
Legal Description of Property:
Tract A, Registered Land Survey #78,
subject to easement of record.
Public Utilities:
The building is connected.
Transportation:
73�d Avenue and the University Avenue
Service Road provide access to the
property.
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Physical Characteristics:
Lot contains the gas station store building, with an
attached Taco Bell restaurant, fueling pumps, car
wash building, hard surface parking and driving
areas and landscaped and pond areas.
SU M MARY OF PROJECT
The petitioner, Collins Electrical Systems, who is
representing Holiday Companies, is requesting a
special use permit to allow electronic reader board
signs to replace the existing gas pricing sign and the
manual reader board sign on the existing pylon sign
at the Holiday gas station which is located at 7295
University Avenue.
SU M MARY OF ANALYSIS
City Staff recommends approval of this special use
permit, with stipulations.
Electronic changeable signs are an approved
special use in the commercial zoning district,
Aerial of the Site
CITY COUNCIL ACTION/60 DAY SCHEDULE
City Council — February 8, 2010
60 Day Date — February 15, 2010
Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg
SP #10-01
REQUEST
The petitioner, Collins Electrical Systems, who is
representing Holiday Companies, is requesting a special
use permit to allow an electronic gas pricing sign and an
electronic reader board to replace the manual existing
gas pricing and reader board on the existing pylon sign at
the Holiday Gas Station/Taco Bell which is located at
7295 University Avenue.
A 70 sq. ft. free-standing sign already exists on the
subject property. The petitioner is planning to remove
the existing manual gas pricing sign and manual reader
board sign and replace them with electronic LED signs.
The installation of the two electronic signs will bring the
total sign area to 80 sq. ft.
HISTORY AND ANALYSIS
The subject property is located on the southeast corner
of 73�d Avenue and University Avenue. The property is
zoned C-2, General Business. Motor vehicle fuel and oil
��� `�� � ' -' dispensing
� � x� �" `�' services are a
� �x
,� r•� � �_ �
� � �3�= ; permitted special
� �,
�� ,
a��� _
� fr " �y� ��. -. use in the G2,
r i�.� ' $� ���� General Business
, �_
,��� ��� ' `� zoning district. In
---.� ���� ,�, 1998, a special use permit was issued to allow an
automobile service station, a car wash and a drive-in
�r �� ��� �'� -�� ,�� �� type establishment. As a result, the property was
� •'�-�r developed in 1998, with the construction of the existing
'�� � ����� service station, Taco Bell restaurant and car wash
,, �z.,- building. A sign permit for the existing pylon sign was
� ���° rn ,r'��,'` ''�.,� also obtained in 1998. In 2002, when Holiday
rn � '�� �,�; �,,r Companies purchased the property, the sign faces on the
� pylon sign were changed to recognize the change in
r� ' ' � � � � ownership.
� �
CODE REQUIREMENTS
Electronic changeable signs are an approved special use in any zoning district, except
residential, provided the message doesn't change more often than once every 45 seconds. The
sign also needs to be in conformance with the sign requirements for the zoning district, in which
the property is located. The subject property is zoned, C-2 General Business, which requires
that free standing signage can not exceed 80 square feet in size. The existing sign meets that
size requirement as will the re-face of the existing manual signs with the electronic signs. The
total sign area after the modifications will be 80 square feet, with the new electronic gas pricing
sign being 15 square feet, and the electronic reader board portion being 31.2 square feet. The
total electronic signage portion on this sign is 46.2 square feet on a total 80 square foot sign.
The free standing sign meets all other sign code requirements, including but not limited to size,
setbacks, and height.
City staff hasn't heard from any neighboring property owners.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Staff recommends approval of the special use permit as electronic changeable signs are an
approved special use in the commercial zoning district, provided the sign complies with Code
requirements, subject to stipulations.
STIPULATIONS
City Staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be
attached.
1. The petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to installing
any signage on site.
2. Message on L.E.D. sign shall not change more often than authorized under Section
214.07 of the Fridley City Code.
3. Message on L.E.D. sign shall never flash or have motion that may distract vehicular
traffic in the area.
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -
A RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP# 10-01
FOR COLLINS ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS, ON BEHALF OF NORTH OAKS AMOCO
INC., THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 7295 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE
WHEREAS, Section 214.07.01 of the Fridley City Code allows electronic changeable signs in
commercial zoning districts by a special use permit if certain conditions can be met; and
WHEREAS, on January 20, 2010, the Fridley Planning Commission held a public hearing to
consider a request by Collins Electrical Systems, on behalf of the property owner of 7295
University Avenue in Fridley, on Tract A, Registered Land Survey #78, for a special use permit SP#
10-01 for an electronic changeable sign; and
WHEREAS, on February 8, 2010, the Fridley City Council approved the stipulations represented in
Exhibit A to this resolution as the conditions approved by the City Council on special use permit
SP# 10-01; and
WHEREAS, the petitioner, Collins Electrical Systems, on behalf of the properry owner of 7295
University Avenue, was presented with Exhibit A, the stipulations for SP# 10-01, at the February 8,
2010 City Council meeting;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Fridley that the
Special Use Permit SP# 10-01 and stipulations represented in Exhibit A are hereby adopted by City
Council of the City of Fridley.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS gtn
DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010.
SCOTT LUND — MAYOR
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
EXHIBIT A
SP# 10-01 Special Use Permit for an Electronic Changeable Sign
North Oaks Amoco, Inc., 7295 University Avenue NE, Fridley, MN
Stipulations
1. Petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to installing any signage
on site.
Message on L.E.D. sign shall not change more often than authorized under Section 214.07 of the
Fridley City Code.
Message on L.E.D. sign shall never flash or have motion that may distract vehicular traffic in the
area.
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEI'
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
William W. Burns, City Manager
James P. Kosluchar, Public Works Director
Layne Otteson, Assistant Public Works Director
February 8, 2010
PW10-008
Receive Plans and Order Advertisement for Bids for the 2010 Sewer Lining
Project No. 394
The Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement budget has funds identified for rehabilitation of our
sanitary sewer lines. We will be doing this work on two segments in 2010. The project includes
lining of 0.99 miles of sanitary sewer main. Work is proposed on two segments as follows:
Area A, Area B, and Area C
This segment is 15" diameter vitrified clay pipe located under the shoulder of University
Avenue. The pipe traverses from Rice Creek Terrace to 61 St Avenue (4,193'). This
segment includes work on large diameter pipe, and traffic control will likely necessitate off-
peak work hours to mitigate traffic impacts.
Area D
This segment is 8" diameter vitrified clay pipe. The proposed project includes lining along
Stinson Boulevard from Gardena Avenue to 61St Avenue (1,025'). This segment is more
typical of our recent lining work, with small-diameter lining of pipe with many residential
services.
The 2010 budget for this project is $185,000. The cost of the work is estimated at $187,500 at this
time. The current bidding climate is quite unpredictable and the project quantities will be reduced
should the bid exceed the budgeted amount. This project is funded entirely from sanitary sewer
rates.
Engineering staff has prepared plans and specifications for this project. Recommend the City
Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing staff to advertise for the Sanitary Sewer Lining
Project No. 394.
JPK:jpk
Attachments
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -
A RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT, APPROVAL OF PLANS AND ORDERING
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS: SANITARY SEWER LINING PROJECT NO. 394
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Fridley has established a policy of lining sanitary sewers
when necessary, and
WHEREAS, the Engineering Division has presented a goal to the City Council of lining 50% of the
City's sanitary sewers by the year 2050, and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has submitted a plan showing the sanitary sewers in need
of lining for the current year,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Fridley, Anoka
County, Minnesota, as follows:
That the sanitary sewers recommended for lining by the Public Works Department be lined, and the
work involved in said improvement shall hereafter be designated as Sanitarv Sewer Linin._�ject
No. 394. The project will include segments described as follows:
University Avenue from Rice Creek Terrace to 61St Avenue
Stinson Boulevard from Gardena Avenue to 61 St Avenue
2. The plans and specifications prepared by the Public Works Department for such improvement and
each of them, pursuant to the Council action heretofore, are hereby approved and shall be filed with
the City Clerk.
The work to be performed under Sanitary Sewer Lining Project No. 394 be performed under one
contract as may be feasible based on bids received.
The Director of Public Works shall accordingly prepare and cause to be inserted in the official
newspaper advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved
plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published at least 10 days prior to bid opening,
and shall specify the work to be done and will state that bids will be opened at 2:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, March 3, 2010, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, and that no bids will be
considered unless sealed and filed with the Director of Public Works and accompanied by a cash
deposit, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City of Fridley for five percent (5%) of the
amount of such bid. That the advertisement for bids for Sanitary Sewer Lining Proj ect No. 394 shall
be substantially standard in form.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS gTx
DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010.
SCOTT J LUND - MAYOR
Attested:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
� AGENDA ITEM
� COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
� �F CLAI MS
FRIDLE7`
CLAIMS
144950 - 145122
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
��F LICENSES
FRIDLE7`
TYPE (�F LICENSE: APPLICANT: ' ' APPROVEIa B�:
Temporary Liquor Consumption TOTINO-GRACE Public Safety
& Dis la A ri124, 2010
Chris Beach , Director of
Advancement
Temporary Liquor Consumption TOTINO-GRACE Public Safety
& Dis la November 20, 2010
Chris Beach, Director of
Advancement
Temporary Lawful Gambling Fridley Historical Society Public Safety
Permit Raffle April 24,2010 Mary Sue Meyer, Event Chair
Location American Legion Post
#303
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
��F LICENSES
FRIDLE7`
Contractor T e A licant A roved B
Deziel Ht & Air Conditionin Inc Heatin Mike Deziel Ron Julkowski, CBO
North Count Air Inc Heatin K le Ber man Ron Julkowski, CBO
Rich Construction LLC Commercial or Jason Rich Ron Julkowski, CBO
S ecial
Stern Heatin & Coolin Inc Heatin Ben�amin Stern Ron Julkowski, CBO
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEI'
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
William W. Burns, City Manager
James Kosluchar, Public Works Director
February 8, 2010
PW10-0()6
Preliminary Assessment Hearing on Street Rehabilitation
Project No. ST2010-01
Pursuant to discussion and direction of the City Council, a feasibility report has been
prepared by the City of Fridley Public Works Department with reference to the 2010
Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST2010-01. On January 25, 2010, this report was
presented to the City Council. The City Council set a date for a public hearing on
assessments for February 8, 2010 at 7:30 PM.
Two hundred eighty-three (283) residential properties and five (5) commercial properties
are subject to assessment on the project, in conformance with the City of Fridley's
Roadway Major Maintenance Financing Policy. Properties receiving exclusive benefit
from improvements on County Roads are not included in the proposed assessment roll
at this time.
Staff has been very careful about following all proper procedures for notifying the affected
property owners subject to assessment, such as individual letters inviting them to the
meeting, which were mailed on January 26, 2010. Publication serving as legal notice of
the hearing has been posted in the Focus Legal Ads section January 28, and February 4,
2010.
Staff also invited 424 neighboring property owners to a project open house held on
January 19, 2010. At the open house, staff presented project construction information,
including project scope and tentative schedule. Approximately 73 property owners
attended the open house. Staff was available to address questions and concerns from
attendees.
Staff requests that the City Council open the preliminary assessment hearing on Street
Rehabilitation Project No. ST2010-01 and hear all those who desire to address the
Council.
JPK:jpk
Attachment
CITY OF FRIDLEY
NOTICE OF HEARING ON IMPROVEMENTS
2010 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. ST. 2010-1
WHEAREAS, the City Council of the City of Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota has deemed it
expedient to receive evidence pertaining to the improvements hereinafter described.
NOW, THEREFORE, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT on the 8tht'' day of February, 2010, at 7:30
p.m. the City Council will meet at the Fridley Municipal Center Council Chambers, 6431 University
Ave., N.E., Fridley, MN and will at said time and place hear all parties interested in said improvements
in whole or in part.
The general nature of the improvements is the construction (in the lands and streets noted below) of the
following improvements, to-wit:
Street and utility improvements, including asphalt milling, hot mix bituminous paving, aggregate base,
water main replacement, concrete curbing, street striping, and boulevard restoration located as follows:
2010 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. ST. 2010-01
Mississippi Street
Squire Drive
Dana Court
Camelot Lane
Rice Creek Road
Woodside Court
Briardale Road
Briardale Court
61St Avenue
McKinley Street
Kristin Court
Ben More Drive
Kerry Lane
Rice Creek Drive
Kerry Circle
Femdale Avenue
60�' Avenue
Oakwood Manor
River Edge Way
Riverview Terrace
Riverview Terrace
Mississippi Way
Alden Way
Ashton Avenue
64'/2 Way
Trunk Highway 65 to Stinson Boulevard
Camelot Lane to Mississippi Street
Squire Drive to east terminus
Squire Drive to east terminus
Central Avenue to Stinson Boulevard
Benjamin Street to east terminus
Benjamin Streetto Stinson Boulevard
Briardale Road to south terminus
Benjamin Street to Stinson Boulevard
61St Avenue to south terminus
Stinson Boulevard to south terminus
Kerry Lane to west terminus
Rice Creek Drive to Rice Creek Road
Kerry Lane to approx. 350' east
Kerry Lane to west terminus
Benjamin Street to west terminus
Benjamin Street to west terminus
Gardena Ave to 60�' Avenue
East River Road to East River Road
62"d Way to approx. 180' north of Alden Way
Approx. 100' north of 63'/2 Way to Mississippi Way
Riverview Terrace to East River Road
62"d Way to Riverview Terrace
Mississippi Way to approx. 160' south
Riverview Terrace to East River Road
All of said land to be assessed proportionately according to the benefits received by such improvement.
Hearing impaired persons planning to attend the public hearing who need an interpreter or other person
with disabilities who require auxiliary aids should contact Roberta Collins at 763-572-3500 no later
than the 8th day of February, 2010.
Published: Fridley Focus January 28, 2010 & February 4, 2010
�
�
CffY OF
FRIDLEI'
TO:
FROM
DATE
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
William W. Burns, City Manager
James P. Kosluchar, Public Works Director
Layne R. Otteson, Assistant Public Works Director
February 8, 2010
PW10-007
SUBJECT: Street Rehabilitation Project ST2010-01 - Resolution Directing Preparation of Final
Plans and Ordering Advertisement for Bids
The attached resolution directs preparation of final plans and specifications and authorizes the
advertisement for bids for the 2010 Street Rehabilitation Project No. ST2010-01. This portion of
the City's annual mill and overly program proposes to rehabilitate local streets in the neighborhoods
of Harris Lake, Benjamin Briardale, Gardena, Ashton, and River's Edge Way. The total project
length is approximately 3.5 miles (18,500 centerline feet). This is in addition to a separate project
on 61St Avenue / Moore Lake Drive, which adds 1.7 miles (9,000 centerline feet) to our
rehabilitation construction this year.
This project has two divisions of work. The first is a 2"-2'/" deep mill and overlay over the local
streets described above. The second component includes a 2" deep mill and overlay of Mississippi
Street and Rice Creek Road, designated County State Aid Highway 6 and County Road 106.
These are included as part of the project as they are adjacent to the proposed work, and are in
need of resurfacing. Anoka County has indicated their agreement to fund the construction and
project adm inistration for these two streets, and we are working on a draft Joint Powers Agreement
at this time to formalize this arrangement.
The repaving work is funded using special assessments and MSAS funds. The work on County
roadways will be paid for by Anoka County. Water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater costs are
funded by their respective utilities.
A Public Hearing on special assessments for this project is scheduled for the February 8, 2010,
City Council meeting.
Staff recommends that after the public hearing, the City Council adopt the attached resolution to
prepare final plans and specifications and call for bids for the work.
JPK:jpk
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -
RESOLUTION ORDERING FINAL PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CALLING FOR BIDS:
2010 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. ST 2010 - O1
WHEREAS, the construction of certain improvements is deemed to be in the interest of the City of
Fridley and the property owners affected thereby, and
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley has prepared a Capital Improvement Plan to systematically reconstruct
streets in the City to a standard section including concrete curb and gutter, and
WHEREAS, the City of Fridley's Engineering Department has completed preparation of a feasibility
report and estimates of costs thereof for the improvements.
WHEREAS, pursuant to direction of the City Council, a report has been prepared by the City of Fridley
Public Works Department with reference to the specific improvements, and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2010-06 adopted January 25, 2010 received the feasibility report and called
for a public hearing on the matter of the construction of certain improvements listed therein, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing regarding said improvements was set for February 8, 2010, and ten days'
mailed notice and two weeks' published notice of the hearing was given, and
WHEREAS, the public hearing regarding said improvements was held thereon on February 8, 2010 at
which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA:
1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasibility
report.
2. That the improvements proposed in the feasibility report are hereby ordered to be effected
and completed as soon as reasonably possible, to-wit:
3. Street improvements, including milling and overlaying with hot-mix bituminous
pavement and ancillary work associated with these improvements, to be constructed on
the following streets:
Mississippi Street
Squire Drive
Dana Court
Camelot Lane
Rice Creek Road
Woodside Court
Briardale Road
Trunk Highway 65 to Stinson Boulevard
Camelot Lane to Mississippi Street
Squire Drive to east terminus
Squire Drive to east terminus
Central Avenue to Stinson Boulevard
Benj amin Street to east terminus
Benjamin Streetto StinsonBoulevard
Briardale Court
61 St Avenue
McKinley Street
Kristin Court
Ben More Drive
Kerry Lane
Rice Creek Drive
Kerry Circle
Ferndale Avenue
60th Avenue
Oakwood Manor
River Edge Way
Riverview Terrace
Riverview Terrace
Mississippi Way
Alden Way
Ashton Avenue
64'/z Way
Briardale Road to south terminus
Benj amin Street to Stinson Boulevard
61st Avenue to south terminus
Stinson Boulevard to south terminus
Kerry Lane to west terminus
Rice Creek Drive to Rice Creek Road
Kerry Lane to approx. 350' east
Kerry Lane to west terminus
Benj amin Street to west terminus
Benjamin Street to west terminus
Gardena Ave to 60th Avenue
East River Road to East River Road
62"d Way to approx. 180' north of Alden Way
Approx. 100' north of 63'/z Way to Mississippi Way
Riverview Terrace to East River Road
62"d Way to Riverview Terrace
Mississippi Way to approx. 160' south
Riverview Terrace to East River Road
4. That the work be incorporated in the 2010 STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT NO.
ST2010-01.
5. That the work be performed under this project may be performed under one or more
contracts as may be deemed advisable upon receipt of bids.
6. That the Director of Public Works, James P. Kosluchar, is hereby designated as the
engineer for this improvement. He shall oversee the preparation of plans, specifications
and estimates of costs thereof for making of such improvements.
7. That final plans, specifications, and estimates are prepared by the Public Works
Engineering Division and provided to the City Council as they are completed.
8. That the Engineering Division call for bids in order that proj ect award and construction
can be considered.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS 8t'' DAY
OF FEBRUARY 2010.
SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
CffY DF
FRIDLEY
DATE: February 2, 2010
TO: Wlliam Burns, City Manager
FROM: Scott J. Hickok, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Resolution for SAV #10-01, Easement Vacation for 480 Osborne Road
INTRODUCTION
Fifty-two years ago this month, Osborne Manor 2nd Addition`s Plat was recorded. The plat was
designed as a 12 lot plat, with 6 single-family lots facing Osborne Road and 6 single-family lots
facing what was then platted as 76th Avenue, NE. A utility and drainage easement ran east to
west, between the north and south sets of six lots. It is that easement being considered for
vacation today.
The Osborne Manor 2nd Addition plat was filed, but never built as a single family development.
Instead, a church occupied the land until it was purchased years later to become part of the
hospital campus. The right-of-way for this short segment of 76th Avenue was vacated on
October 3, 1988. North Suburban Hospital District now owns the property where 76th Avenue's
right-of-way was once depicted and they also own the remaining land area included in the
original Osborne Manor 2nd Addition plat, including the land beneath the easement to be
vacated.
As you know, the North Suburban Hospital District has now received preliminary approval for a
new plat called Unity Addition. As part of that process it was discovered that though 76th Avenue
was properly vacated in 1988, the residual residential easement was not. The best approach to
easement vacation is always formal action to vacate and to attach the public record at time of
filing the new plat at the County Recorder's office.
What was once intended as an easement for utility access to 12 single family lots, is not the
same type of easement that would be required for the new Fridley Medical Center and Virginia
Piper Cancer Center that has been reviewed and approved through the Special Use Permit
process. In fact, not only is this easement not needed, it is lying in a location that would
eventually be underneath the building for these new uses.
Historically, the City looks for a replacement easement to be dedicated by the petitioner when a
vacation is requested. In this case the City has obtained the required easements through the
platting process for the Subsequent Unity Addition plat. Therefore, no additional easements will
be required. Consequently, staff recommends approval of the requested easement vacation
without stipulations.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
On January 20, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for SAV #10-01. After a
brief discussion the Planning Commission recommended approval of SAV #10-01.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNAMIOUSLY.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission through approval of the attached
resolution.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION TO VACATE A PORTION OF A UTILITY AND DRAINAGE
EASEMENT LYING WITHIN THE VACATED 76TH AVENUE NE, GENERALLY
LOCATED AT 480 OSBORNE ROAD.
WHEREAS, this utility and drainage easement lying within the vacated 76th Avenue no
longer serves the purpose it was originally instead to serve;
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on this matter by the Planning Commission on
January 20, 2010 and the City Council on February 9, 2010.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED that the City of Fridley vacate the following:
All of the Utility and Drainage Easements, as shown and dedicated on the final
plat of OSBORNE MANOR 2N� ADDITION, according to the recorded plat
thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY
THIS 8t'' DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010.
SCOTT LUND - MAYOR
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN - CITY CLERK
�
�
CfTY OF
FRIaLE7
Date
To
AGENDA ITEM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
February 2, 2010
Wlliam Burns, City Manager
From: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director
Julie Jones, Planning Manager
Stacy Stromberg, Planner
Subject: Public Hearing for Rezoning Request, ZOA #10-01, Tri-Land Properties, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
Glenn Johnson of Tri-Land Properties Inc., from Westchester Illinois, owner of the subject
property at 250 57th Avenue, is seeking to rezone the property from C-3, General Shopping to
PUD, Planned Unit Development. The purpose of the rezoning is to allow for the
redevelopment of the entire site to what the developer is calling The Fridley Market.
Tri-Land Properties Inc, is
proposing to redevelop the
existing Cub Foods/Fridley
Liquor Store site. The
redevelopment will allow for
structural changes to the
existing building,
modernization of the
existing building exterior
farade, and construction of
new retail buildings along
the north side of the
property as well as the
south side of the property.
The site will also undergo
reconstruction of the parking
lot and entrances to
promote multi-modal
access, and installation of
146 new trees and
landscaping.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At the January 20, 2010, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held for ZOA
#10-01. After some discussion between the Commission and staff and the Commission and the
petitioner, the Planning Commission recommended approval of rezoning, ZOA #10-01, with the
stipulations as presented by staff.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION
City Staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission and an addition of
stipulation #32. Staff feels that this stipulation is important as it requires the petitioner to revise
the traffic study to show the potential impacts of a restaurant use within Retail A and Retail B.
Staff has notified the petitioner regarding the necessary adjustments to the traffic study.
STIPULATIONS
1. The property shall be developed in accordance to the General Plan for Development
Agreement, which will include the architectural plans dated and the
Architectural Design and Signage Guidelines dated .(This agreement shall
be prepared by the petitioner and approved by staff prior to City Council review of
the rezoning request.)
2. The General Plan for Development Agreement must include a three-year time limit to
construction inactivity between phases until full build out of the site is complete as
proposed.
3. The property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan SP.1 dated
, which will incorporate the stipulations included herein and approved by staff.
(Site plan shall be revised per City staff comments included in staff report prior to
City Council review of the rezoning request.)
4. The building elevations and signage shall be constructed in accordance with
architectural plans , dated . (Architectural elevations
shall be modified to list every material to be used on each side of each of the
building and architectural design and signage guidelines shall be modified per City
staff's request prior to City Council review of the rezoning request.)
5. Phasing Plan shall be modified to show demolition of the entire 50 feet on the front of
the building to be completed within one year of the opening of the Cub Foods store
and the plans and shall be redone to show modification of parking areas and
installation of landscaping, signage and pedestrian connections.
6. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for each phase prior to construction,
including but not limited to building, land alteration, sign permits.
7. The proposed project and phasing shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA
requirements.
8. City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to
issuance of building permits.
9. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of
building permit. Any dead trees on the site will need to be replaced annually.
10. Applicant of building permit applications, to pay all water and sewer connection fees
prior to issuance of a building permit.
11. The subject property shall not be allowed to have telecommunication facilities or
billboards constructed on it.
12. Existing light poles and fixtures on the south side of the subject property shall be
removed during Phase 1 of the proposed project or by June 15, 2010, whichever
comes first.
13. Truck route serving all buildings proposed for site shall follow a one-way counter
clock-wise loop entering from west entrance of site and exiting the east entrance of
site; revised site plan reflecting such change to be submitted for staff approval prior
to second reading of ordinance. No truck loading will be allowed on 57t`' Avenue.
14. All lighting shall be no more than 3-foot candles at the property line.
15. Site Plan must be redrawn to relocate outdoor sale areas to a location off of an
access drive aisle. Fence design around the outdoor sa/es area shall be reviewed
and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 2A. If the
/oss of parking or snow storage space resulting from use of the outdoor sale area
creates a parking shortage, the outdoor sale areas use must remain solely for
parking.
16. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be clearly delineated with colored striping or colored
pavement to accommodate safe pedestrian movement between the retail buildings.
17. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Anoka County
Highway Department.
18. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Minnesota
Department of Transportation.
19. No firework displays shall occur within the outdoor sa/es areas.
20. No fertilizer shall be stored outside.
21. Access to Holiday Station store and CVS Pharmacy shall be maintained during
construction.
22. Bike racks shall be provided on site per code requirements.
23. Design detail shall be provided for the main sidewalk running north and south in the
parking lot.
24. Specific areas shall be designated for snow storage and a plan shall be submitted
showing those areas, prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 1.
25. The petitioner shall submit a comprehensive sign plan to be attached to the General
Plan for Development.
26. Applicant will have to provide a specific stormwater conveyance and treatment
system plan for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to
construction commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not
been shown on plans to date.
27. Applicant will have to provide a speci�c temporary and permanent erosion control
plan for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to construction
commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not been shown
on plans to date.
28. Access easements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment
facilities, and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley
as approved by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
29. Maintenance agreements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment
facilities, and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley
as approved by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
30. As part of a maintenance agreement for the stormwater collection system, a
permanent SWPPP will be submitted for the site and approved by Engineering to
include consideration for treatment facility maintenance, minimization of
contaminated runoff from garden center areas, truck dock areas, snow storage
areas, etc. This will be provided prior to construction commencement.
31. Applicant will have to provide a specific utility plan for approval by Engineering for
each phase prior to construction commencement. An approved plan may include
facilities that have not been shown on plans to date. Note that inclusion of
restaurants, cafes, or dining areas of all types will require external grease traps
approved by Engineering on respective sanitary sewer discharge lines.
32. The traffic studv shall be revised to show traffic impacts to the site and surroundinq
road network for a restaurant use or restaurant use with the drive-thru within Retail A
and Retail 8. Upon completion the petitioner shall provide revised traffic data to the
City, County and Mn/DOT for approvals.
City of Fridley Land Use Application
ZOA #10-01 January 20, 2010
GENERAL INFORMATION
Applicant:
Tri-Land Properties Inc.
Glenn Johnson
1 Westbrook Cor. Ctr. Ste. 520
Westchester IL 60154
Requested Action:
Rezoning from C-3 to PUD
Location:
250 57th Avenue NE
Existing Zoning:
C-3, General Shopping
Size:
667,775 sq. ft. 15.33 acres
Existing Land Use:
Cub Foods, Fridley Liquor Store and
McDonalds
Surrounding Land Use & Zoning:
N: Commercial Uses & an Apartment
Building & C-2
E: CVS Pharmacy & University Avenue &
C-3 and ROW
S: Interstate 694 & ROW
W: Home Dept & C-3
Comprehensive Plan Conformance:
Future Land Use Map designates this area
as Redevelopment.
Zoning History:
• 1966 — Existing retail building
constructed.
• 1967 & 1968 — temporary garden center
allowed.
• 1975 — Rezoning approved from
industrial to commercial.
• 1976 — SUP granted to allow a mobile
home sales office.
• 1977 — SUP granted to allow a photo
booth in the parking lot.
• 1983 — Variance approved to reduce
required parking stalls from 950 to 800.
• 1983 — Plat approved to split off 1 3/
acres.
• 1988 — SUP approved for a garden
center.
• 1994 — Variance approved to allow a
loading dock facing a public right-of-way
• 1995 — Building addition for shopping
cart storage.
• 1999 — Lot replatted.
• Several interior modifications have been
made to the building over the years.
Legal Description of Property:
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Lot 2, Block 1, Holiday North 2na Addition,
subject to easement of record.
Public Utilities:
Existing building is connected, utilities are
available in the street for proposed new
buildings.
Transportation:
Property is accessed from 57th Avenue.
Physical Characteristics:
Building, hard surface parking areas, and
landscaping.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
The petitioner, Glenn Johnson, on behalf of Tri-Land
Properties, Inc., is seeking a rezoning of the subject
property located at 250 57th Avenue, from C-3,
General Shopping to PUD, Planned Unit
Development. The purpose of the rezoning is to
allow for the redevelopment of the site.
SU M MARY OF ANALYSIS
City Staff recommends approval of the
rezoning, with stipulations.
■ Proposed rezoning meets the goals highlighted
in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
■ Provides added tax value to an underutilized
retail site
■ Provides additional iob opportunities.
Aerial of the site
Council Action / 60 Day Date
City Council — February 8, 2010
60 Day Date — February 15, 2010
60 Day Extension Date — April 16, 2010
Staff Report Prepared by: Stacy Stromberg
ZOA #10-01
THE REQUEST
Glenn Johnson of Tri-Land Properties Inc., from Westchester Illinois, owner of the subject
property at 250 57th Avenue, is seeking to rezone the property from C-3, General Shopping to
PUD, Planned Unit Development. The purpose of the rezoning is to allow for the
redevelopment of the entire site to what the developer is calling The Fridley Market.
PROPOSED PROJECT
Tri-Land Properties Inc, is proposing to redevelop the existing Cub Foods/Fridley Liquor Store
site. The redevelopment will allow for structural changes to the existing building, modernization
of the existing building exterior farade, and construction of new retail buildings along the north
side of the property as well as the south side of the property. The site will also undergo
reconstruction of the parking lot and entrances to promote multi-modal access, and installation
of 146 new trees and landscaping.
The redevelopment is proposed to occur in several phases. The first phase will include
construction of an addition to the east side of the existing building, which will house the Fridley
Liquor Store as well as space for three, 1,200 square foot retail shops. Once the addition is
completed, Phase 2A involves Cub Foods beginning construction on their new space. They will
move their store to the east side of the building and will occupy 65,000 square feet of space,
which is a smaller building footprint then what they currently occupy. Cub Foods will remain
open and in business within their existing space until their new space is ready to open. The
existing building will actually be reduced approximately 21,000 sq. ft., which will be achieved by
removal of a portion of the front of the building.
Proposed Building Elevations
a'i .iF c�r,h _ ...
i7?– n z3-:
'� 3 "I.A – i:�i 4F �li;t; – � !ti iF .I;4 – — ff.ha ��..1'�i ���
?'-4 ,"a� �.r –.i _i°� :� –� ...' 1 F .J a
N.`.'dl YSN� �M tAI d kE� �� N rMk JStNE � � �
� . Num�. .a: NE, " `�`,. r ., . =h,
� 3 F:.: a� 1 F-�E
i�.u�.uE ht�.ar r�, �i uu. n :+ !.r r,tt �+ueke : E�ll:E, �xst Fw+uE ,C�t�FE ��Hv�ti
RA? "aF
� ������!.H.�� .�...x. ;_.r:
�w�,s
Phase 2B will include the construction of "Retail A", which is a 10,500 square foot building that
is located on the north side of the site, just south of 57th Avenue. Phase 3A, includes removal of
the front portion of the building for "Anchor A" as well as construction of a pedestrian connection
from 57th Avenue to the main building. Phase 3B, includes the construction of another retail
building on the north side of the site, to be 9,600 square feet in size. Phase 4 will allow for the
development of the south side of the subject property with the construction of a 29,000 square
foot building, proposed to be shared between two tenants. Reconstruction of the parking lot
and installation of landscaping will take place throughout all the proposed phases. A copy of
the phasing plan has been attached for your review.
Proposed Site Plan
3 ,, .
--------��r++-----�.------�--------------_---
. ;
II
�;
�
��
��
�
��
��
�
��
�
SITE HISTORY
In 1966, the original 165,000 square foot building was constructed. There has only been one
addition to the original building, which was a 360 square foot addition in 1995 to allow for
shopping cart storage. Several interior modifications have been made to the building over the
years. Special use permits were also issued over the years for a mobile home sales office, a
photo booth in the parking lot and for garden centers. The lot has been replatted to allow for the
creation of the existing Holiday gas station lot. The current CVS lot was created by Holiday
Company with the original plat and was intended as a Holiday station store. However, Holiday
ended up buying a site where Gateway East now stands and then Holiday sold their outlot to
Cattle Company, which is now CVS.
2
Two variances were also granted on the subject property since it was originally developed, one
to reduce the amount of required parking stalls and another to allow the construction of a
loading dock facing the public right-of-way. With the exception of a parking lot reconfiguration in
the late 1990's, the site hasn't changed substantially over the last 40+ years.
In the mid 2000's, City staff had been contacted by Holiday Companies, who was the owner at
the time, about the redevelopment of the subject property. Shortly after our discussions with
them, they sold the property to Tri-Land Properties, Inc. Tri-land is now pursuing
redevelopment of the site.
ANALYSIS
Rezoning Request, #10-01
Tri-Land Properties Inc. is requesting a rezoning for the Cub Foods/Fridley Liquor site, located
at 250 57th Avenue, from C-3, General Shopping to PUD, Planned Unit Development. This is
the first Planned Unit Development rezoning the City of Fridley has seen since Bordeaux's
Springbrook Addition plat of 1961. That PUD is a single-family residential neighborhood on
Fairmont Circle, off of East River Road. Though those properties are zoned PUD, staff wouldn't
consider that a typical PUD development seen today.
Planned Unit Developments typically are intended to achieve the following:
• Provide greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict application of
the zoning ordinance in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity.
• Encouraging a more creative and efficient approach to the use of the land.
• Encouraging the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural
features and open space.
• Encouraging a development pattern that is consistent with land use density,
transportation facilities and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
The City's Zoning Ordinance and official Zoning Map are the mechanisms that help the City
achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan
identifies that subject property to be within one of the "potential redevelopment areas." Those
redevelopment areas were developed based upon community input at neighborhood planning
meetings and staff recommendations. Redevelopment is a form of community revitalization that
transforms undesirable elements of a site into desirable elements that reflect the community's
collective plan. Approving this project through a PUD requires the petitioner to submit a
"General Plan of Development" which consists of maps, including phasing components,
descriptive statements of objectives, principals and standards used in the project. It also
requires that any modification of the originally approved PUD, be reviewed before the City
Council which is similar to the process the City uses for master plan approval on an S-2,
Redevelopment project.
The subject property is within the "Northstar Transit Oriented Development, (TOD)"
redevelopment area within the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Redevelopment of this area would
provide several objectives highlighted within the Comprehensive Plan: Including the removal or
revitalization of older, blighted, or outdated buildings, providing an opportunity for more efficient
land uses, providing an opportunity to build new commercial buildings, create additional job
opportunities, strengthening tax base, and creating opportunities for new streetscape
improvements.
Redevelopment of this site also accomplishes several of the goals identified through the
neighborhood meetings and the telephone survey for the Comprehensive Plan. Those goals
are to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable place to live" and to "Maintain Fridley as a desirable
place to invest in business." Ways identified to accomplish those goals were to create a
�
walkable downtown area (the Northstar TOD area was identified as the best place in Fridley for
a walkable downtown, because of its proximity to the train station), provide more retail
opportunities (the community spoke loud and clear about wanting more retail opportunities and
the fact that they felt like several of our shopping areas were in desperate need of
redevelopment), provide more restaurants, and maintain current tax base and encourage
growth.
Architectural Design and Signage Guidelines
As part of the process to allow a rezoning to a PUD, Planned Unit Development, it is very
important to establish guidelines that dictate what type of quality development will occur on the
site. Wthin those guidelines there are several elements that need to be discussed and agreed
upon in the General Plan of Development, in order to lead the developer and the City into an
approved PUD. The petitioner has hired, Kathy Anderson of Architectural Consortium to help
establish design criteria, which will become an Exhibit of the General Plan for Development.
Some of the details outlined in this document are listed below:
• Building Orientation — site planning concept with multiple buildings on one site with a
focus inward as well as outward towards the public right-of-way and the importance of
moving buildings closer to the street.
• Building Design — discusses Building Mass and Farade Design. Varying rooflines,
adding the use of canopies, and other accents to visually break-up walls.
• Building Materials — provides a list of acceptable building materials.
• Doors and Windows — encouraging windows on all sides of the building, etc.
• Screening — discusses screening loading docks, drive-thru's, and rooftops units with the
use of building materials, walls, landscaping
• Franchise Design — tenants are allowed to maintain their corporate identity but shall use
similar materials, chosen in the guidelines.
• Landscape and site treatment — creating common themes, landscaping used for
screening, planters, pots encouraged to be used along paved areas.
• Parking — the need to accommodate bicycle/motorcycle parking, create cross parking
between users, site plan shall allow for clear connections and movement for pedestrians
and motorists
• Lighting — Uniform lighting throughout the site, with the use of ornamental lighting on the
buildings and in the parking lot.
• Flags — perimeter flag poles on the site to be key focal points
• Pedestrian connections — creating pedestrian linkage to all buildings on the site and to
the public sidewalk system, creation of outdoor seating areas, striping crosswalks
• Signage (Wall Signage and Free-standing) — to create consistency throughout the
development with architectural character, base on monuments made out of masonry,
usage of awnings.
The above list in not meant to be comprehensive, but to provide a general list of elements
outlined in the guidelines. A copy of the guidelines has been attached for your convenience.
The Architectural Design and Signage Guidelines becomes a critical part of a PUD because that
along with the drawn plans illustrates what the development would essentially look like and what
is and is not allowed. It becomes the "rules" for the site and any modification to those rules will
require an application for a new PUD.
Staff isn't in complete agreement with everything provided in the attached Architectural Design
and Signage Guidelines and will be requiring that some modifications are made before it
becomes part of the General Plan for Development. Generally we want it to be clear in the
document that a 4-sided building needs to be constructed on all buildings within the
development.
�
** Since the time this staff report was written the petitioner has agreed to modify their
guidelines to clearly document that each building needs to be designed in such a way
that it's considered a 4-sided building with architectural features and details on each
side.
Site Plan Review
The proposed redevelopment plan is risky since the only known future tenant at this time is Cub
Foods. It is important to note that this plan is based upon market assumptions that newly
developed spaces will fill according to the phased plan for redevelopment to bring the entire
PUD to completion. But, the developer seems confident enough to advance this proposal.
The proposed redevelopment of the site will allow for the revitalization of both the interior and
exterior of the existing building. Though an addition will be constructed on the east side of the
building, 50 ft. of the entire north wall of the existing building will be removed, therefore reducing
the square footage of the main building by approximately 21,000 sq. ft. The proposed site plan
also identifies 3 free-standing buildings, two on the north side of the property and one along the
south edge of the property. Those new buildings will be incorporated into the existing parcel
and will not require creation of lots of their own.
Staff suggested that the petitioner seek a potential rezoning to a PUD, instead of seeking
variances to the standard C-3, General Shopping zoning district regulations. For example, the
C-3 zoning code requires a front yard setback of 80 ft. and a side yard setback on corner lots of
80 ft. Since the subject property has streets on all sides of it, code would require an 80 ft.
setback for buildings on all sides. Placement of the new buildings, closer to the street, would
not meet that setback requirement. Since the subject property is within the Northstar TOD
district, staff would prefer to see building brought closer to the street, to help create a downtown
environment that provides a pedestrian scale to the retail area.
Staff asked the petitioner to try to comply with the C-3, General Shopping code standards as
much as possible, with the understanding that some of the requirements will not be able to be
met. Below staff has created a table illustrating what typical C-3 zoning code standards would
require and how the petitioner can or cannot meet those standards. Areas where they are not
meeting the C-3 standards are shaded.
�
Front yard setback — Fridley City code requires that the shortest street frontage be considered
the front yard. In the case of the subject property, University Avenue would be considered the
front yard. The petitioner proposes to construct a new 14,000 square foot addition to the east
side of the existing building, which will be 35 ft. from the front yard property line, therefore, not
meeting the code required 80 ft. setback.
Side yard setback (north) — Because this property has street frontage on all sides, an 80 ft. side
yard setback is required per C-3 zoning regulations. The proposed Retail A building is 15 ft.
from side yard property line and the Retail B building is 30 ft. from the side yard property line.
As stated earlier, because this site is within our Northstar TOD, staff would like to see the
buildings brought closer to the street, as proposed. This helps create the idea of a"walkable
downtown", which adds to the existing streetscape along 57th Avenue, provides close
connections for pedestrians and bicyclists and it will conceal parking to the opposite side of the
building.
Side yard setback (south) — Again, City code would require an 80 ft. setback. Proposed Anchor
B is 72 ft. from the side yard property line and Anchor C is 55 ft. from the side yard property line.
Street frontage on all sides of this property provides a great challenge when trying to consider
full build-out of the site.
Parking setback from a public right-of-way— The petitioner's site plan shows as little as a 5 ft.
setback between the property line and the parking lot in locations along the south, east and
north property line. City code requires a 20 ft. parking setback from a public right-of-way to
allow an adequate separation between a particular use and the right-of-way. This area also
serves as space needed for sidewalks, landscaping, screening and snow storage. City staff is
overall concerned about the lack of green space on this site plan. Though the petitioner is
meeting code requirements for the amount of trees required to be planted, staff feels that there
are parking stalls proposed that will never be used and would be better utilized as green space.
L•�
If additional green space can be added on this site and if there is adequate room designated for
snow storage, staff would be comfortable with the deficient parking setback.
** Since the time this staff report was written the petitioner has removed several of the
parking stalls along the southern edge of the property that staff believes would never be
utilized and has added additional green space in this area.
Number of stalls, size of stalls, and drive aisle width — The petitioner is proposing to install 851
parking stalls when code would only require 775 stalls at full build out of the site. In 2006, the
City reduced the parking stall requirements for commercial zoning districts, requiring 1 stall for
every 250 square feet of space. Reducing this parking requirement allows for additional green
space on a site, while still meets the parking needs of retailers.
** Since the time this staff report was written the petitioner has removed several parking
stalls along the southern property line to add additional green space, which in turn has
changed their parking numbers. The petitioner is now showing 754 parking stalls, which
is 21 less stalls than what code would require, however staff is comfortable with his
number because of the flexibility allowed with a PUD rezoning.
City code requires that parking stalls in our commercial districts be 10 ft. wide by 20 ft. long if
they are nose to nose stalls or 10 ft. wide by 18 ft. long if the stall abuts a curb. Over the years,
the City has had many requests by other commercial, educational, and medical type uses to
allow a smaller lot size. In some instances the City has allowed a reduction in the width of a
stall for those parking stalls that have a low customer turnover. For example: employees at a
medical clinic or students at a school.
The petitioner has submitted a study conducted by Metro Transportation Group Inc., who is out
of Hoffman Estate, Illinois. Their research is based on information obtained by The Urban Land
Institute, the National Parking Association and the Parking Consultants Council. Based on their
research moderate to higher turnover visitor parking, community retail and medical visitor
spaces can be accommodated with a parking stall size of 8'-9" to 9'0" wide. Those situations
where turnover is less can be accommodated by a smaller stall. As a result, they conclude that
the stall size of 9 ft. wide and 18 ft. long for the proposed redevelopment is adequate.
The petitioner also completed a parking field analysis, demonstrating the difference between a 9
ft. by 18 ft. stall and a 10 ft. by 20 ft. stall. Based on the square footage of the new Cub Foods
(65,177) and Retail A(10,500), which is one of the free-standing buildings on the north side of
the building, 262 stalls would be constructed at a stall size of 9 ft. by 18 ft. Increasing the size
of the stall to a 10 ft. by 20 ft. stall would reduce the amount of stalls to 196, which is 66 less
stalls. According to the petitioner, the 9 ft. by 18 ft. stall is a necessity for them and for Cub
Foods, in order to make the project work.
** The Planning Commission approved the project with a 9 ft. by 18 ft. parking stall.
The petitioner is showing a 24 ft. drive aisle is some of the parking lots and 25+ in others. Code
requires a 25 ft. drive aisle for two way traffic. It's also important to point out that the Fire
Marshall requires a 25 ft. drive aisle around the main building and Anchor B and C for fire
access and safety.
As stated earlier staff, is concerned about the general lack of green space on this property.
Staff understands how important parking is for Cub Foods and the petitioner and with a PUD
rezoning it does allow flexibility when designing a project. However, staff feels that some
requirements related to parking cannot be modified. As a result, staff is comfortable allowing
7
the stall size to be reduced to 9 ft. wide, however, the stall length needs to be increased to the
code required 20 ft. long for nose to nose parking stalls and can be 18 ft. long for those stalls
that abut a curb. Staff will also require that all drive aisles remain at 25 ft., to help ensure the
safety of the motoring public, and customers walking on site and to provide clear fire access
throughout the site.
** Since the time this staff report was written the petitioner has agreed to increase the
size of the drive aisle width in all locations from 24 ft. to 25 ft. to meet code requirements.
Landscape (tree count) — The petitioner is complying with the code required amount of trees
that need to be planted on this site. However, they are deficient is meeting the code required
amount of coniferous trees. Code requires that 30% of the trees planted shall be coniferous
trees in order to continue to beautify the site in winter months and to potentially help with
screening. As a result, staff feels that it's necessary that the petitioner replace seven of the
proposed shade trees with coniferous trees.
** Since the time this staff report was written the petitioner has agreed to install the
additional coniferous trees required by code.
Signs (free-standing) — Originally the
petitioner had submitted plans showing seven 1=1'—�`'
free-standing signs on the site. They were
proposing to place four signs along Interstate *s`� I`°�_ ';E,=�;
694 and three along 57th Avenue, all of which --_ _w __ _ —
would allow for multi-tenant shared signage. �� y yy .� ���,_�--{`'~X
Staff articulated to the petitioner very early in - ��
the application process that the amount of
free-standing signage proposed would not be . =,"� _m
supported by staff. City code does allow one � ,! ,5-;t i'; ,�,�'�i
free-standing sign per street frontage in our '''' x�' °' .�- ' w
commercial zoning districts and a few years `i � � � �w ��
ago we adopted special language that would � � � � �r � � � �'
{__.r �,`: �. ��.:v � _ �.m
allow larger signs to those properties that are �:•;
within 275 ft. of Interstate 694. After several - �`
internal staff discussions and site visits to ��I�f
other similar types of commercial '��'
developments, staff determined that we would
be comfortable allowing one free-standing '—� "� —�"
sign per street frontage on this site. This
property is somewhat unique in the fact that
there is frontage on all 4 sides. As a result,
staff determined that it would be acceptable to �
allow two 200 sq. ft. and two 80 sq. ft. free- ,
standing signs on this property. With a
condition that one of the 80 sq. ft. signs
cannot be installed until Anchor B and Anchor
C on the south side of the property is
developed. The petitioner is agreeable to this
solution. They are currently proposing to install one 200 sq. ft. sign on the southwest corner
(near Main Street & I-694) and one 200 sq. ft. sign near the westbound entrance ramp to I-694,
and one 80 sq. ft. sign along 57th Avenue.
:
Flag Poles - While they are not treated as signs in City Code, it should be noted that flag poles
are incorporated as key focal points in the petitioner's sign guidelines. The petitioner's
landscape plan includes 21 flag poles into the site, incorporated into all sides of the
development.
Signs (wall signage) — City Code requires a specific formula for wall signage. That requirement
is 15 times the square root of the length of the wall. In the case of multi-tenant buildings, staff's
policy is to take the length of space a particular tenant leases and then take 15 times the square
root of that leased space. In most situations, our code allows more than adequate signage. In
the case of the smaller retail buildings, Retail A& B and Anchor B& C, City code wall signage
requirements will be met.
However wall signage on the main building is over what code would typically allow. After many
years of reviewing wall sign permits, Staff has determined that when it comes to a larger scale
building with very long wall lengths, our formula can end up not allowing the sign to be
proportionate to the mass of the building. In 2004, Ashley Furniture requested variances to our
wall sign allotment to allow larger signs on the north, east and west sides of the building. The
City Council granted variances to allow signage up to two times larger than what code would
allow on the north and east walls. This situation is similar to that of the Cub Foods building in
that the large scale of the building requires the need for greater signage. As a result, staff is
comfortable allowing the signage proposed in the architectural plans for the main building.
Additional Review of the Proposal
Outdoor Sa/es Area — The petitioner is proposing to have (2) outdoor sales areas that will be
used 10-12 weeks out of the year. Cub Foods would primarily use this area for garden sales in
the spring and early summer. The areas that they've highlighted on their site plan will be 36 ft.
by 93 ft. (3,348 sq. ft.) in size and will be designed using decorative pavers. The petitioner has
created a"pergola" structure that will be installed during the 10-12 weeks sales period and will
be removed and returned to parking stalls at the conclusion of the sales period. All access to
the proposed sales area will be from within the interior parking lot and not from the drive aisle
into the development. The petitioner plans to install no parking signs along the drive aisle to
prevent people from parking in the drive aisle to obtain goods from the outdoor sales area.
Staff would suggest that these outdoor sales areas be moved to the interior portions of the
parking lots for Cub Foods and Anchor A. The petitioner does plan to construct a fence around
this area and will restrict access to the garden center from the interior parking lot only, but staff
still feels that the proposed locations, along the main driveways into the site will likely create
safety issues. Confusion could be created for those motorists entering and existing the site and
those who are trying to use the sales area. Moving the location to the interior portion of the
parking lot will eliminate any potential confusion.
** Since the time this staff report was written the petitioner has agreed to move the
outdoor sales areas into the interior portion of the parking lot, alleviating any staff
concerns.
Public Gathering Area
The C-3 zoning code allows garden centers or nurseries which require outside display or
storage of inerchandise with a special use permit. This site has received special use permits in
the past for garden centers, when the site was used as a Holiday Store. The most recent SUP
for a garden center issued on this site was in 1988; required the sales area be attached to the
building and only accessed through the building and not the parking lot.
�
'F: ":', �.�: N�
L l..:R.. L L I .:I... l l ➢ _1... l 1 1 _0... 4r� l I _L..._Il..�
# �� � P �8 �S � � � �� �
� � ' � �.�� �� � � ' �i�. � 5� ; ' ��
$ � �� : r�. � , , u v�, � �: �. �� , �r- � ..
There are other properties within the City that � �,�,,.
have SUP's for garden centers. Some ,�,,.,,�, �, ,n,, �
examples of those are Bachman's, Home
Depot, Wal-mart, and Menards. In all those
situations, the City required that the business
� F.0 F � �; �.;.,:..,..�-t�
construct a permanent structure attached to '� "�" ''° "
� ->>.
their building for their garden centers as ��� �'` �� ' �
opposed to a free-standing tent type garden -�
' � _ , � ,h
center often seen in other communities. In lieu � �° �� , ���� � ~�#�.
C�" t = , , r; � �-�, �.
of constructing a permanent structure for , ,-��C�� , � ,� t k � �-� � �- �.�� { � �� ��f >
garden sales the petitioner and more `` '">i�� � `� �'� � + �� ' � � f��� `� {~.`
, �h .E , �" _�-. � �
}' {�i� ��4�°. ����a��`�� � '�s�
importantly Cub Foods, is requesting to have '� *.� f � �� � �- - - � , � . t. �
the outdoor sales area within the parking lot. �`� �' �� �
�..
` ��.� �'
Instead of simply putting up a tent, the �:�i�' �} }�`"`�`
petitioner has designed a decorative paver �� `� �,is-�.�-��� `�,`'
area with a temporary pergola that will have � - �: 4 �� jx
cedar posts, and maintenance free fencing. _ �
Cub Foods is a 24 hour operation, so they have ,�,:,: ,
expressed to staff that although the garden `
center won't be open 24 hours, they do have
staff that will be on-hand to provide security and theft control. Staff feels this solution is unlike
what we have seen in other applications, but would consider it acceptable considering it's a
PUD zoning, which allows flexibility when designing a project.
Staff does have some concerns about the location and stormwater impacts of fertilizer use in a
garden center. Further review of watershed requirements will be needed.
Public Gathering Area, Patio Area — The petitioner is proposing to construct a public gathering
area with Phase 2A-2B. This area will have an arbor constructed within it, with seating and
perimeter landscaping. This area has the potential of creating a nice environment for
employees who work on site or customers who shop on site. There is also a patio area planned
for the east side of Retail A, which will provide an outdoor seating option for a potential
restaurant.
Dumpster Enclosure Locations — City staff has been working with the developer on developing
preferred placement of dumpsters for the two most northern buildings along 57th Avenue. Staff
would ideally prefer to see them incorporated into the building or attached to the building in a
way that hides them from the public right-of-way. The latest plans depict a dumpster enclosure
for Retail A attached to the monument sign and a dumpster enclosure at the south building wall
setback from Retail B. Both enclosures will be constructed of material comparable to the
material used for the building and will be surrounded with landscaping. Though this isn't staff's
ideal location for the dumpster enclosures, through architecture, building materials, and
landscaping these enclosures should essentially blend into their surrounding environment.
Multi-Modal Connections — Any redevelopment within the Northstar TOD Redevelopment Area
is expected to have clear connections for walkers and bikers, as well a vehicles. This site is
only %2 mile from the Northstar train station and there is a bus stop at the corner of University
Avenue and 57th Avenue. Staff has emphasized the importance of pedestrian connectivity to
and throughout this site to the petitioner throughout our discussions.
Staff is currently in the process of developing a new ordinance that will be a Transit Oriented
Development overlay district for the areas surrounding the Northstar commuter rail station. The
Tri-land site is proposed to be included in the proposed TOD overlay district. The City plans to
10
require sidewalks and bike trails in this overlay district, which will allow people to get safely from
mass transit stops in the area to shopping and neighboring residential areas. Due to limited
public funding, staff anticipates cooperating with private property owners to create new
multimodal connections within redevelopment projects.
As a result of discussions with staff, the petitioner has created some sidewalk connections on
their site. There are connections from 57th Avenue to Retail A and B on the north side of the lot
and connections on the west side of the lot to the main building and to Anchor B and C. They
have also created a main pedestrian walkway from the east side of Retail B, connecting to the
main building. They plan to raise the walkway with a barrier curb on each side to provide the
protection for pedestrians utilizing the walk. At the location where the walk actually crosses the
drive aisle the raised walk will transition or ramp back down to the elevation of the drive aisles.
It is unfortunate though that this connection isn't planned to take place until Phase 3A. Staff
would prefer for it to be constructed sooner in the phasing process, if possible. An important
multimodal connection that staff feels the petitioner is overlooking is a connection from the bus
stop at 57th and University and the new development proposed on the east end of the site. It is
likely that many employees of the retail center will be taking the bus to work. It is not realistic
that a person walking or biking from the bus stop will travel west along 57th Avenue to the
walkway proposed into the site by Retail B if they are traveling to the CUB Store or the liquor
store. They will cut across the CVS parking lot, which poses risks because of their drive-thru
traffic. Staff recommends that the petitioner be required to explore the possibilities of an eastern
access along the east end of the CVS site or outside the MnDOT chain link fence to the
northeast corner of the new eastern building area.
Truck Traffic — The petitioner has submitted plans showing truck circulation on the site. Staff
has determined that it's very important to have a one-way movement on the site that moves
counter clock-wise around the main building. Trucks cannot stand and wait in the queuing area
between University Avenue and the CVS entrance. Nor do we want customers on this site
having to navigate around trucks from all directions.
Phasing Plan — As described above in the "Proposed Project" section of this report, the
petitioner has submitted a phasing plan. A phasing plan needs to be provided to the City as a
requirement of a PUD. When the new Cub Foods store is being redeveloped as part of Phase
2A, 50 ft. by 297 ft. of the front of the building will be removed to make the Cub Foods new
entrance. The remaining 50 ft. of the existing building is shown in the plans to remain as is until
Phase 3A. This is something that staff is not comfortable allowing. We would recommend and
will stipulate that the remaining 50 ft. of the front of the building be removed at the same time
the Cub Foods portion is being removed. Considering there isn't a clear indication as to how
long of a gap in time there will be in-between phases, staff does not want the old portion of the
building to remain as is for years while the new Cub Foods is up and running. Removing and
refacing the rest of the building will be required as part of this PUD rezoning, during Phase 2A.
Staff would also like to see more detailed phasing plans showing when modifications will
happen to the parking lot and when landscaping, signage and pedestrian connections are
proposed to be installed.
Existing Green Space south of the Existing Main Building — The development of Anchor B and C
is proposed to take place in the last phase of the overall project. This space is currently green
and staff will stipulate that it remain that way until which time it is developed according to the
proposed PUD site plan. Existing dilapidated parking lot fixtures located near the south green
space will need to be removed within the first phase of this project.
11
TRAFFIC
2030 Comprehensive Plan — Transportation Chapter
The City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan indicates that in 2005, the portion of University Avenue
adjacent to the existing Cub Foods/Fridley Liquor Store site carried 34,500 vehicles per day. At
this traffic level, it's carrying 2,500 less vehicles per day than its maximum design capacity.
Using the State's range of 31,000 to 37,000 vehicle trips per day the roadway is
within specifications to function at a Level of Service (LOS) D. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan
anticipates that University Avenue will be carrying 44,100 vehicles per day by the year 2030,
based upon increases in population for Fridley & surrounding communities, as well as
redevelopment and reinvestment within Fridley. At 44,100 vehicles / day, University Avenue
would be above its design capacity. This project may bring the roadway and its intersection at
57th Avenue and University Avenue closer to capacity, earlier than anticipated. As a result, the
Minnesota Department of Transportation was asked to comment on the perceived or real
impacts of the development. To date, the City hasn't received their comments, but will place a
stipulation on the rezoning that if approved it will need to comply with any conditions set for by
M N/DOT.
Since 57th Avenue and Main Street (south of 57th Avenue) are County roadways, the City has
also notified the County Highway Department of the proposed project and is awaiting their
comments. Again, staff will place a stipulation on this rezoning request that will require the
petitioner to comply with any conditions set forth by the County.
Review of Traffic Study information
The petitioner had Westwood Professional Services, Inc., perform a traffic impact study on the
proposed project. The consultants conducted their study by analyzing traffic volumes, trip
generation, trip distribution, and they completed an operational analysis. The executive
summary states the following, "Fridley Market is located within an area of roadways that are fully
analyzed, designed, and constructed consistent with the projected future area traffic volumes.
The last major construction in this area was completed in 1998. At the present time the Fridley
Market site has a 44,000 sq. ft. vacancy. If this vacancy were to be filled, the total traffic
volumes in the area could be accommodated by the surrounding roadway network with only a
minor change in signal timing at one nearby intersection; no lane additions or other physical
roadway changes would be needed. Beyond filling of the current vacant space, analyses were
also conducted of the impact of traffic to be generated by the redevelopment of the surrounding
roadway network. The results indicate that the surrounding roadways are capable of supporting
the added traffic from site redevelopment at acceptable levels of service again through only
minor signal timing modifications at one intersection."
Westwood is suggesting that although the intersection into the subject property and the
intersection at Main Street and 57th Avenue operate at a Level of Service A, the intersection at
57th Avenue and University Avenue currently operates at the LOS C and will operate at the LOS
D or worse after the redevelopment of this site. This level of service is based primarily on the
northbound left turn movement at this intersection. Westwood recommends that the mitigation
measure used to restore acceptable operations of this intersection is by optimization of the
signal timing at the intersection. Specifically, it is suggested that the green time for the
northbound left movement be increased, with the southbound through movement decreasing by
a like amount to maintain a 160-second cycle length. Wth this mitigation measure in place, the
overall intersection LOS will improve to C.
Since University Avenue is a State right-of-way, staff is waiting to see if MN/DOT is agreeable to
this mitigation measure. MN/DOT has the proposed plan and traffic study and is in their review
process. As stated earlier, staff will require the petitioner to comply with whatever MN/DOT
requires as part of this redevelopment.
12
The City Engineer reviewed the petitioner's traffic study and commented that the petitioner will
need to provide concurrence from MN/DOT and Anoka County that mitigation of traffic impacts
through timing revisions of the TH47 and 57th Avenue signal system can be accommodated as
stated in the traffic analysis provided, or any revisions of the plan may be necessary. He also
pointed out that the traffic study failed to recognize that two of the new retail spaces are
proposed to be restaurants and one of them with a drive through. The traffic implications from
this type of use are calculated at much higher rates than retail, so Westwood's study needs to
be modified to reflect the correct use. Once the traffic projections are modified to reflect the
correct use that revised information will need to be forwarded to MN/DOT and Anoka County.
** Staff will be adding an additional stipulations to the City Council memo to require that
the petitioner revised the traffic study to show Retail A and Retail B potentially having a
restaurant use or a restaurant use with a drive-thru so accurate traffic count numbers
can be achieved.
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT
Stormwater treatment concepts are shown on the plan, but a fully identified and detailed
stormwater plan is incomplete for the entire site build-out. Similarly, utility plans have been
provided, but details and specifications are not completely provided as required for construction
approval. Also, no stormwater, erosion control, or utility phasing plans have been provided or
reviewed.
** Since the time this staff report was written the petitioner is agreeable to meeting any
requirements set forth by the City's engineering department and has been in contact with
them.
STAFF RECOMMEDATION
City Staff recommends approval of the Rezoning ZOA #10-01, with stipulations. The rezoning
accomplishes the following objectives.
• Proposed use meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
• Provides added tax value to an underutilized retail site
• Provides additional job opportunities.
STIPULATIONS
Staff recommends that if Rezoning, ZOA #10-01 is approved, the following stipulations be
attached.
1. The property shall be developed in accordance to the General Plan for Development
Agreement, which will include the architectural plans dated and the
Architectural Design and Signage Guidelines dated .(This agreement shall
be prepared by the petitioner and approved by staff prior to City Council review of
the rezoning request.)
2. The General Plan for Development Agreement must include a three-year time limit to
construction inactivity between phases until full build out of the site is complete as
proposed.
3. The property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan SP.1 dated
, which will incorporate the stipulations included herein and approved by staff.
(Site plan shall be revised per City staff comments included in staff report prior to
City Council review of the rezoning request.)
4. The building elevations and signage shall be constructed in accordance with
architectural plans , dated . (Architectural elevations
shall be modified to list every material to be used on each side of each of the
13
building and architectural design and signage guidelines shall be modified per City
staff's request prior to City Council review of the rezoning request.)
5. Phasing Plan shall be modified to show demolition of the entire 50 feet on the front of
the building to be completed 'n Ohnrr-nuv°c crnr within one vear of the openinq of the Cub
Foods store and the plans and shall be redone to show modi�cation of parking areas
and installation of landscaping, signage and pedestrian connections.
6. The "°�'� applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for each phase prior to
construction, including but not limited to building, land alteration, sign permits.
7. The proposed project and phasing shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA
requirements.
8. City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to
issuance of building permits.
9. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of
building permit. Any dead trees on the site will need to be replaced annually.
''O, i�rncc r»rl iniv o�comonic mi�cl� ho rlo�iolnr�orl �nrl Y�I+/lY/`I�/`I I'/1 �Iln�ni �II I�on�nl�c
11. �r^^o.+„ n�ninar „f rannrr! �� +:.,-,o Applicant of building permit applications, to pay all
water and sewer connection fees prior to issuance of a building permit.
12. The subject property shall not be allowed to have telecommunication facilities or
billboards constructed on it.
13. Existing light poles and fixtures on the south side of the subject property shall be
removed during Phase 1 of the proposed project or by June 15, 2010, whichever
comes first.
14. Truck route serving all buildings proposed for site shall follow a one-way counter
clock-wise loop entering from west entrance of site and exiting the east entrance of
site; revised site plan reflecting such change to be submitted for staff approval prior
to second reading of ordinance. No truck loading will be allowed on 57t`' Avenue.
15. All lighting shall be no more than 3-foot candles at the property line.
16. Site Plan must be redrawn to Y°m�rcmvvc-vr�°c relocate outdoor sale areas �n,� �^ m^„°
fh�f ram�ininiv ,,,,�,�,,,,r ��►o �ro� to a location off of an access drive aisle. Fence
design around the outdoor sa/es area shall be reviewed and approved by City staff
prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 2A. If the /oss of parking or snow
storage space resulting from use of the outdoor sale area creates a parking
shortage, the outdoor sale areas use must remain solely for parking.
17. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be clearly delineated with colored striping or colored
pavement to accommodate safe pedestrian movement between the retail buildings.
18. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Anoka County
Highway Department.
19. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Minnesota
Department of Transportation.
20. No firework displays shall occur within the outdoor sa/es areas.
21. No fertilizer shall be stored outside.
22. Access to Holiday Station store and CVS Pharmacy shall be maintained during
construction.
23. Bike racks shall be provided on site per code requirements.
24. Design detail shall be provided for the main sidewalk running north and south in the
parking lot.
25. Specific areas shall be designated for snow storage and a plan shall be submitted
showing those areas, prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 1.
26.
I�n ho ro�iio�niorl �nrl �r�r�rn�iorl h�i cl��{F YlY1/lY I�n i�il��i i�ni�nnil°c C�I+/1H/`I Y�^�/`IIH/Y nf �ho
ra�nniniv raivi�acf �c n�ri nf fha miJfi_fan�nf ciivn nl�n ra�iia�ni fh�f �niill naar! fn ha
14
. The petitioner shall
submit a comprehensive siqn plan to be attached to the General Plan for
Development.
`Z7 Chnnniniv n�ri cfnr�iva �niifhin n�rliiniv Inf ch�ll ha irlanfi�ar! nn cifa nl�n fn ha
�� h� nrinr (`if�i (`ni�nnil r�T����^�� nL�rp�,l�,�
��r..,r. .. � ......, y . �.h...
28. Applicant will have to provide a specific stormwater conveyance and treatment
system plan for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to
construction commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not
been shown on plans to date.
29. Applicant will have to provide a speci�c temporary and permanent erosion control
plan for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to construction
commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not been shown
on plans to date.
30. Access easements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment
facilities, and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley
as approved by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
31. Maintenance agreements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment
facilities, and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley
as approved by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
32. As part of a maintenance agreement for the stormwater collection system, a
permanent SWPPP will be submitted for the site and approved by Engineering to
include consideration for treatment facility maintenance, minimization of
contaminated runoff from garden center areas, truck dock areas, snow storage
areas, etc. This will be provided prior to construction commencement.
33. Applicant will have to provide a specific utility plan for approval by Engineering for
each phase prior to construction commencement. An approved plan may include
facilities that have not been shown on plans to date. Note that inclusion of
restaurants, cafes, or dining areas of all types will require external grease traps
approved by Engineering on respective sanitary sewer discharge lines.
34. The traffic study shall be re-done to show traffic impacts to the site and surroundinq
road network for a restaurant use or restaurant use with the drive-thru within Retail A
or Retail 8. Upon completion the petitioner shall submit to the Citv, Countv and
Mn/DOT for approvals.
15
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY, MINNESOTA
BY MAKING A CHANGE IN ZONING DISTRICTS
The Council of the City of Fridley does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Appendix D of the Fridley City Code is amended hereinafter as indicated,
and is hereby subject to the stipulations as shown in Attachment 1.
SECTION 2. The tract or area within the County of Anoka and the City of Fridley and
described as:
250 57t" Avenue NE
Lot 2, Block 1, Holiday North 2nd Addition, subject to easement of
record.
Is hereby designated to be in the Zoned District PUD
(Planned Unit Development)
SE CTION 3. That the Zoning Administrator is directed to change the official zoning map
to show said tract or area to be rezoned from Zoned District C-3 (General
Shopping) to PUD (Planned Unit Development).
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FRIDLEY THIS
8tn DAY OF MARCH, 2010.
SCOTT J. LUND — MAYOR
ATTEST:
DEBRA A. SKOGEN — CITY CLERK
Public Hearing: February 8, 2010
First Reading: February 22, 2010
Second Reading: March 8, 2010
Publication:
ATTACHMENT ONE
1. The property shall be developed in accordance to the General Plan for Development
Agreement, which will include the architectural plans dated and the
Architectural Design and Signage Guidelines dated .(This agreement shall
be prepared by the petitioner and approved by staff prior to City Council review of the
rezoning request.)
2. The General Plan for Development Agreement must include a three-year time limit to
construction inactivity between phases until full build out of the site is complete as
proposed.
3. The property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan SP.1 dated ,
which will incorporate the stipulations included herein and approved by staff. (Site
plan shall be revised per City staff comments included in staff report prior to City
Council review of the rezoning request.)
4. The building elevations and signage shall be constructed in accordance with
architectural plans , dated . (Architectural elevations
shall be modified to list every material to be used on each side of each of the building
and architectural design and signage guidelines shall be modified per City staff's
request prior to City Council review of the rezoning request.)
5. Phasing Plan shall be modi�ed to show demolition of the entire 50 feet on the front of
the building to be completed within one year of the opening of the Cub Foods store
and the plans and shall be redone to show modification of parking areas and
installation of landscaping, signage and pedestrian connections.
6. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for each phase prior to construction,
including but not limited to building, land alteration, sign permits.
7. The proposed project and phasing shall meet all Building code, Fire code, and ADA
requirements.
8. City engineering staff to review and approve grading and drainage plan prior to
issuance of building permits.
9. Landscape plan to be reviewed and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of
building permit. Any dead trees on the site will need to be replaced annually.
10. Applicant of building permit applications, to pay all water and sewer connection fees
prior to issuance of a building permit.
11. The subject property shall not be allowed to have telecommunication facilities or
billboards constructed on it.
12. Existing light poles and �xtures on the south side of the subject property shall be
removed during Phase 1 of the proposed project or by June 15, 2010, whichever
comes first.
13. Truck route serving all buildings proposed for site shall follow a one-way counter
clock-wise loop entering from west entrance of site and exiting the east entrance of
site; revised site plan reflecting such change to be submitted for staff approval prior
to second reading of ordinance. No truck loading will be allowed on 57t`' Avenue.
14. All lighting shall be no more than 3-foot candles at the property line.
15. Site Plan must be redrawn to relocate outdoor sale areas to a location off of an
access drive aisle. Fence design around the outdoor sa/es area shall be reviewed
and approved by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 2A. If the
/oss of parking or snow storage space resulting from use of the outdoor sale area
creates a parking shortage, the outdoor sale areas use must remain solely for
parking.
16. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be clearly delineated with colored striping or colored
pavement to accommodate safe pedestrian movement between the retail buildings.
17. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Anoka County
Highway Department.
18. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Minnesota
Department of Transportation.
19. No firework displays shall occur within the outdoor sa/es areas.
20. No fertilizer shall be stored outside.
21. Access to Holiday Station store and CVS Pharmacy shall be maintained during
construction.
22. Bike racks shall be provided on site per code requirements.
23. Design detail shall be provided for the main sidewalk running north and south in the
parking lot.
24. Speci�c areas shall be designated for snow storage and a plan shall be submitted
showing those areas, prior to issuance of a building permit for Phase 1.
25. The petitioner shall submit a comprehensive sign plan to be attached to the General
Plan for Development.
26. Applicant will have to provide a specific stormwater conveyance and treatment
system plan for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to
construction commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not
been shown on plans to date.
27. Applicant will have to provide a specific temporary and permanent erosion control
plan for approval by Engineering for each development phase prior to construction
commencement. An approved plan may include facilities that have not been shown
on plans to date.
28. Access easements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment
facilities, and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley
as approved by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
29. Maintenance agreements for the stormwater collection system, stormwater treatment
facilities, and sanitary sewer and water systems will be provided to the City of Fridley
as approved by Engineering prior to construction commencement.
30. As part of a maintenance agreement for the stormwater collection system, a
permanent SWPPP will be submitted for the site and approved by Engineering to
include consideration for treatment facility maintenance, minimization of
contaminated runoff from garden center areas, truck dock areas, snow storage
areas, etc. This will be provided prior to construction commencement.
31. Applicant will have to provide a specific utility plan for approval by Engineering for
each phase prior to construction commencement. An approved plan may include
facilities that have not been shown on plans to date. Note that inclusion of
restaurants, cafes, or dining areas of all types will require external grease traps
approved by Engineering on respective sanitary sewer discharge lines.
32. The traffic study shall be revised to show traffic impacts to the site and surrounding
road network for a restaurant use or restaurant use with the drive-thru within Retail A
and Retail 8. Upon completion the petitioner shall provide revised traffic data to the
City, County and Mn/DOT for approvals.
� AGENDA ITEM
� CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 2010
�ff1' 4F
FRIDLE7`
INFORMAL STATUS REPORTS