Loading...
CCM 03/09/2015 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY MARCH 9, 2015 The City Council meeting for the City of Fridley was called to order by Mayor Lund at 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Lund Councilmember Barnette Councilmember Saefke Councilmember Varichak Councilmember Bolkcom OTHERS PRESENT: Wally Wysopal, City Manager Darcy Erickson, City Attorney Scott Hickok, Community Development Director James Kosluchar, Public Works Director Darin Nelson, Finance Director Jack Kirk, Parks and Recreation Director Bruce Carlson, Dorn Companies Joseph Rickenbach, Embers Todd Orsthun, TCO Design APPROVAL OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: City Council Meeting of February 23, 2015 APPROVED. NEW BUSINESS: 1. Receive the Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting of February 18, 2015. Councilmember Saefke stated the year 2013 should be 2015. Councilmember Varichak stated the last name "Milton" should be "Melton". RECEIVED AS CORRECTED. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 2 2. Claims (167404 -167559). APPROVED. 3. Licenses. APPROVED THE LICENSES AS SUBMITTED AND AS ON FILE. OPEN FORUM: No one from the audience spoke. ADOPTION OF PROPOSED CONSENT AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to approve the proposed consent agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA: MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the agenda. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC HEARING: 4. Consider a Rezoning Request, ZOA #15-01, by Alliant Engineering, Inc., on Behalf of the Property Owners of 5300 and 5400 Central Avenue N.E., to Rezone the Properties from C-3, General Shopping, to C-2, General Business, Generally Located at 5300 and 5400 Central Avenue N.E. (Ward 1). MOTION by Councilmember Saefke to continue the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 3 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:08 P.M. Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated the request is to rezone the properties at 5300 Central Avenue, the Super Stop, and also 5400 Central Avenue, Embers, from C-3, General Shopping, to C-2, General Business. The reason for this request at this time is to allow redevelopment of the property at 5300 Central Avenue. Mr. Hickok stated the current zoning of C-3 imposes requirements that make it difficult to redevelop this site. For example, in a C-3 district, the minimum lot size is 35,000 square feet, whereas, the minimum lot size in a C-2 district is 20,000 square feet. The Super Stop is 29,441 square feet and Embers is 31,423 square feet. Both of them fall short of the 35,000. They are considered non-conforming uses, and by this rezoning, they will be brought into conformance. Both parcels are more suitable for the C-2, General Business District. Mr. Hickok stated in 1981 the State of Minnesota filed a Quit Claim Deed to the City of Fridley for the 80-foot piece of right-of-way that runs north and south, directly east of 5300 Central Avenue. That was the right-of-way for Central Avenue at one time. The State determined they no longer needed it and, as a result, it became City right-of-way. As they may recall, similar things happened along Central Avenue and University Avenue. The State took away direct access. At one time there was direct access to Embers and to this gas station; however, when Central was redone several years ago, the 80-foot piece of right-of-way was used to access Embers. They basically deeded that land over to the City of Fridley. Right now it is considered additional land for the redevelopment of 5300. Mr. Hickok stated the existing gas station fuel pumps, canopies, and underground tanks will be removed per MPCA regulations, similar to the Citgo site along University Avenue. All of the same rules will apply, and it will be done properly. Mr. Hickok stated the new 6,048 square foot multi-tenant building is proposed to be constructed in the north/south orientation along the western portion of the site Starbucks will occupy 2,200 square feet of building space; and the remainder of the building will be for retail space and additional users. Mr. Hickok stated it is important for them to know Starbucks has a drive-thru and stacking for 13 cars, which was designed not to interfere with people entering or exiting Embers. Starbucks' national average for maximum number of cars in the drive-thru stacking is 11 cars. A minute and one-half at the window is the corporate customer service standard that controls stacking. Eleven cars are as deep as they like to go. This plan allows for 13 cars to stack. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 4 Mr. Hickok stated the project was designed to require the City to deem 80-feet right-of-way access and authorize the sale thereof to that property in front of 5300 Central Avenue. This was done in conjunction with early discussions with Jim Kosluchar, Public Works Director, and City planning staff. That piece of property really does make the most sense to be joined with the 5300 address, but only after a permanent access easement is agreeable and put in place to continue that access to the Embers site. Mr. Kosluchar has also indicated that the right-of-way is not needed and has been a problematic area for maintenance and snowplowing. Mr. Hickok stated the proposal that was given by the developer and actually agreed upon by both the developer and Embers is a proposal he presented, showing egress and an out, east/west option. Mr. Hickok stated the City had a traffic study done for this segment between the Target entrance and the intersection at 53rd and determined that this signal functions at a Level F. This is not an ideal situation for redevelopment of the intersection; however, staff had a recommendation after the traffic analysis that would make this somewhat better. That is to have ingress at the eastern drive and an egress at the western drive. That out would allow you to go west. It would allow you to go east also. However, for drivers coming from the west, going east, you could still come in that frontage road area or the closest eastern drive. You could also make the corner from Central and come in so there is a counterclockwise loop through the 5300 site or you could go further into the Embers site and come back out. Mr. Hickok stated this proposal is not satisfactory with Joe Rickenbach, the owner of Embers. He is not interested in having a one-way loop for a number of different reasons. He is concerned about cars in line that would cause interference with people getting into his site, including trucks delivering. He is also concerned that people exiting the site from the coffee drive-thru may inconvenience the cars coming from Embers. Mr. Hickok stated it is really important to figure a solution to get cars out on the street. This counterclockwise arrangement functions much like a new shopping center would if you had two users using a one access drive. Mr. Hickok stated at the February 18, 2015, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held. After some discussion the Planning Commission recommended approval of the rezoning as it is an overall better fit for the size and location of the properties. Remembering, that all along University Avenue and Central Avenue, any of the turnback parcels that where there that used to be frontage roads were pulled back and little teardrop parcels were created like the Citgo site. All of them were zoned C-2. This would match that zoning. It makes sense at the intersection to have the modified frontage design to do something in a C-2 character. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the rezoning. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 5 Mr. Hickok stated Council is really acting on the public hearing, taking in comments for rezoning. The first reading would be at the next meeting, and the second reading would be at the following meeting. Council’s role is to hear the comments at the public hearing and to understand that staff is not going to have Council deem the property excess and authorize sale thereof of that 80-foot piece of property until they get the circulation worked out between the property owners. There was some belief after the Planning Commission meeting, and two members stated they did not mind that original access that they proposed that much, but there was no formal action on the part of the Planning Commission to tell Council that is the best solution. Frankly, staff is telling Council that is not the best solution. Mr. Hickok stated since that meeting there has been further discussions. The civil engineer for the developer of 5300 has come up with a solution based on comments from staff. It is not completely the counterclockwise loop, but it is somewhat of a compromise. It still allows people to come into the Embers site and out of the Embers site in alignment very close to where the original drive was. There is somewhat of a pork chop in the middle directing cars when they come out to go west but they cannot go east. This would also allow ingress and an out movement, and they can go east or west from the westernmost drive. This would be acceptable to City staff. This needs to be worked out between the two property owners. If it is not going to be counterclockwise, a one-way maneuver, this is as close as they can come to a solution; and they are hopeful the property owners see it that way as well. As much as they want to see this site redevelop at the corner, they do not want to make the situation worse. Once they have new investment on that corner, they may have a dilemma out in the street. Mr. Hickok stated staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission as the rezoning brings the lots into compliance with lot requirements, and the rezoning will allow redevelop of this gas station site. Mayor Lund asked Mr. Hickok to put up the last drawing he recommended on the inflow and egress. He understands staff is suggesting as to the eastern one, obviously you could come left or right off of 53rd into the eastern driveway. Mr. Hickok replied, yes. Mayor Lund stated and then you only have a right out. Mr. Hickok replied, correct. Mayor Lund asked what stops people from crossing over to go left out. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 6 Mr. Hickok replied there would be signs on the site. A sign saying "No Left" and a maneuver that would cause you to go left would be an illegal maneuver and they could get a ticket. Mayor Lund asked, but they would not expand the center island or something to make that a little tougher. Mr. Hickok replied he would leave that to Mr. Kosluchar to talk about. There is some merit to what Mayor Lund is suggesting.. Mayor Lund stated as to the western driveway where the map is showing an arrow in and out, is there any restriction on going out the second one? They can take a left or a right. Mr. Hickok replied correct. Mayor Lund stated it is problematic, when both driveways are so close together. He can see the confusion of, okay, who is next in line here to go out and go in. He did drive over there yesterday to look at the site to see about a driveway someplace else. The topography is so severe there and there is no room for it. It would be expensive to say the least if not impossible. He would like to see the site redeveloped. It would be an asset to that intersection to have something nice and new. Mayor Lund asked Mr. Kosluchar if he had anything to add whether it would be an illegal left turn out of there. What prevents them from doing that other than a "Right Turn Only" or "No Left Turn"? James Kosluchar, Public Works Director, said they have looked at the corridor here from 53rd to west of the Target entrance. They are looking at it in anticipation of a street repaving project that will be coming up within the next couple years and looking at the wide open access. This plan improves the situation. Could they extend that median? Certainly. One of the issues they are concerned about with doing that would be people are then going to be pushed towards u-turns in other locations, and that is an even more dangerous move. rd Mayor Lund stated, yes, this site does not lend itself for stacking on 53, so if anybody makes a left turn, whether it is the eastern driveway or the western driveway, they are so close there is no room for stacking. He has been in that site on numerous occasions. Forget about making a left turn because there is no stacking room. If there are two cars at that stoplight, you are blocking the road. It is best to make a right turn and in some cases he has made a right turn and went into Target to come back out because there is more stacking room. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 7 Councilmember Barnette stated if they extended the median to the west that would stop people from taking a left into that site. That would not be a good thing either. He would like to hear from the Embers people as to what they think. Mr. Hickok stated one thing to consider is they are not seeing on the entrance to the Discount Tire store. Although civil engineers could not line the driveways up, they did the best they could to make sure access into everything still remains. Councilmember Saefke asked if property owners have had a chance to take a look at this yet and provided any feedback. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it was their idea. Mr. Hickok replied actually this is not the compromise. This is a suggestion based on all facts staff knows. Could they go any further than a counterclockwise loop? Yes, this is as far as they could go beyond that. If that does not work for the property owners, what they are saying is this is as far as they go. The City wants to see that site redeveloped but they have taken the “do no harm” approach. Anything beyond this does harm. Councilmember Saefke stated he has to agree with the Mayor that is one of the worst intersections in town, and there is not a really good solution. A “do not do harm” is a way to go about it even though it is not ideal. They will have to see what happens. He certainly is not opposed to redevelopment or even changing the zoning so it could occur. They can only do what they can do. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she does not see the big issue. If they do not like to only make that turn that way, they can go up and loop around and come back the other direction. It is all going to be one parking lot there, right? Mr. Hickok replied, staff thinks that both will be served actually better. Sometimes it is better when you narrow access points and provide enhanced directions as to where to go. Remember there is no curbing here along the gas station site. You pull out anywhere you want but, by limiting the access points and then giving good clear direction on how you maneuver through, it is actually better for both properties. Mayor Lund stated it is not the site itself. The ingress and egress were the only concern because there is no stacking room. Ideally, the driveways should be further to the west to have some stacking room and allow some time for when someone is coming around the corner. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 8 Wally Wysopal , City Manager, asked staff whether this option they are seeing on the screen now was modeled with the traffic analysis and, if so, what was the impact? Mr. Kosluchar replied, no, it was not specifically modeled. They have had analysis on the corner on 53rd and there are five intersections there. Their recommendation was to have the one-way loop but, because there are so many access points and so many locations and because of the functionality of the traffic signal at the service Level F, everyone is slow in that corridor when it is congested. That is when the recommendation came back from the traffic engineer that the reality is some other movements would not harm it at this time simply because there is so much congestion and so many movements going on at once. The premise of moving the one intersection away from Highway 65 is an improvement, and restricting and limiting the location of the western access was an improvement. The only reason that wide open access is not a problem now is because there is so little traffic going to the gas station now. Councilmember Saefke stated he does see one more problem. If you are traveling south on Central and make a left-hand turn, if you are not familiar with the area you might wind up in the left-hand lane but want to turn right into Target or into Embers. He can see problems with that, especially if people are not familiar with the area. Bruce Carlson, Vice President of Development for Dorn Companies, stated he has been working on this project for over a year. He recently switched to Dorn Companies in June. Prior to that, he was with Mid-America Real Estate. At that point, he was engaged by the property owners at the corner of 53rd and Central, as the owner's representative to try and figure out this Rubik’s cube they see before them tonight. Also here tonight is Mark Kronbeck from Alliant Engineering. Mr. Carlson stated they have been working very closely with City staff and the owner of Embers and his team. They definitely realize it is a challenge. A brief history might help a little bit in that this development they are talking about is actually the idea of Starbucks. Starbucks and their representatives approached the owner on the corner as a possible redevelopment location. The property owners are not interested in selling the property. They have owned the property for over 20 years now and they want to continue that way. Starbucks would lease the property. Right now they have a Letter of Credit and a draft Lease, but obviously they will not sign the Lease until they have all of their entitlements. They are really here serving four entities and trying to make all four entities happy. One of the entities they want to make happy or have to make happy is Starbucks. Secondly, is Embers, who already has a clear access with full access driveway right now. Also, the City and the citizens of Fridley. He would like to throw the property owners in the mix as well. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 9 Mr. Carlson stated throughout this process, he has found everybody to be so professional and helpful. Everyone has real concerns and they have had a really good open dialogue. With City staff and Mr. Rickenbach and his team, it has been an honor for him to work on this. That being said it is still a difficult challenge, and they all have their concerns and will have to make sure it works for everybody. Mr. Carlson stated the last plan that was pulled up was drawn up by Alliant, but he does not want it to be construed that it is a plan they are putting forth today. It is something they look at, comment, and discuss on; but again, everybody has to be on board and right now not everyone is on board with this plan. Mr. Rickenbach from Embers can speak to that. Mr. Carlson stated they like the use and Starbucks is very enthusiastic about being here. They also have a tenant secured for the northern space, and they have interest in the middle space. The tenant is a low-volume user and but does not want to be identified yet. They appreciate all the Council's thought and consideration especially on the zoning on this. Mayor Lund stated what is in it for Mr. Rickenbach going through all this? Mr. Carlson replied, that is a good question for him. Mayor Lund asked whether the architect or anybody considered moving the building from where it is now--either moving it from the left edge to the right. That seems to be kind of a new model in development that you do not put the cars in the parking always in the front, that you put them in the back of the building. Or you take that building and move it 90 degrees so now the fronts are facing 53rd rather than facing Central. You want the left and rights without any restriction as the road they see now with the easement the City has and in this purpose maybe giving Embers and the new tenants to flow behind it so you have some separation between the driveways. In his opinion, the driveways right next to each other lend themselves to look like they are accident prone. Mr. Carlson replied, yes, they did look at that. They probably have six different plans they looked at. First of all, to put the building up by Central Avenue and have it face west, kind of having the back door on Central Avenue does two things. First of all, it totally blocks the Embers visibility from the intersection. Second of all, they have never had good success in development of making the back of the shopping center look like the front of the shopping center. It ends up looking like the back of a shopping center unless tenants are willing to have their front doors and all of the glass be on the Central Avenue side which has people parked on the west side having to walk around. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 10 Mayor Lund said to Mr. Carlson he is saying the front would face Highway 65. That was his first thought, or moving it to the side so the front would now face 53rd and then the parking in that case would all be between Embers and his facility. Mr. Carlson stated, right, turning that building 90 degrees you still come up with the same issue of blocking Embers and then also, right now Embers has kind of a good thing going as they already have their access. They are going to have to speak to what is in it for Mr. Rickenbach. The other thing is they even have had Starbucks architects and designers from Chicago and also in Dallas work on this puzzle as well. With the great staffing that this has and with the visibility to Central Avenue, this is what they were able to get Starbucks to approve. Councilmember Saefke stated there is already a Starbucks inside Target. Why do they want to put another one less than a quarter of a mile? Mr. Carlson said they probably both know the answer to that--money. Starbucks has looked hard at that and if they were partners in a coffee shop and had one there and had one here, they would do better here. They know that. There are so many reasons why. First of all, with families with kids a drive-thru allows you to not have to leave the car and not take all the kids out of the car. There are convenience issues. There is a long list. Councilmember Saefke asked if Starbucks would be removed from Target. Mr. Carlson r eplied, no, because that facility is designed for people who want to drink coffee while they shop or have a cup as they leave shopping. However, if you are on your way to work, and you are in a hurry, the chances of you parking in Target, even if they are open as early as 7:30 in the morning, and leaving and running into Target, is not going to happen. Starbucks knows that. Councilmember Saefke asked does Starbucks know the difficulty of getting in and out of here. Mr. Carlson replied, oh yes they do. They worked with the architects in Chicago and their planners down in Dallas. He has been working on this over a year now. Councilmember Saefke stated instead of fighting with traffic, he would drive up to Caribou up the road to its drive-thru. Mr. Carlson replied that is the beauty of America--you can get coffee anywhere. Starbucks understands the rules of the game. Everybody understands the free market and the advantages and disadvantages that are here. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 11 Councilmember Bolkcom stated she is going back to going in and out of the parking spots. There is a Starbucks off of Fairview and 36. You have to come in there and you also have to back out of there. It is just like a free for all there. Is there enough room for people zipping in there to get their coffee quick and someone else who is backing out of that area? How much space is there between when they are first coming in from the left? Or maybe they will park closer to the building. Mr. Hickok replied they are 25-foot wide drive aisles. This is a standard width drive aisle. The stalls, the nose-in to the landscaped area are 18-foot stalls, and the nose-to-nose are 20-foot stalls (10-foot wide stalls). Between the drive aisles, there is between 10 and 20 feet separation at the setback line. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if she would be able to back out of the one on the west even if someone was coming in. Mr. Hickok replied this would be similar to being at any shopping center. In the shopping center it might be narrower. This is a 25-foot wide drive aisle. Some shopping centers have 20- foot drive aisles. Typically you would stay in your lane and then that car can go past you. Councilmember Bolkcom stated there is the rezoning tonight but City staff has not totally embraced this plan. It seems like one of the biggest issues is the whole traffic thing. Mr. Hickok stated Council is being asked tonight to hold the public hearing on the rezoning. Staff thinks it is important to talk about the access. The beauty of a rezoning is tonight they have their public hearing, the next Council meeting they have their first reading and then in Fridley you have a second reading of the ordinance. They have some time between now and the first or second reading to come up with a conclusion. Staff does not like to bring to Council a situation that is a problem and make them the referees. They want Council to trust staff in solving these problems. However, they do not want to pick sides between property owners; and they have two very good property owners here. Staff is confident that everyone sees the merit of redeveloping here. Everyone understands there is a situation with circulation that needs to be worked on. Staff is confident that between now and the time they get to the second reading they will have a solution. Staff cannot bring a piece of property and ask Council to sell or deed to this property a project because they do not want to deed away that land only to have neighbors fight it. The petitioners are going to solve the problem and bring it to us. They will bring a very nice solution to Council at one of the next two Council meetings. Mayor Lund stated he believed they should be focusing about rezoning this rather than trying to solve the problem of the ingress and egress. With that being said, what he wants to hear from FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 12 Mr. Carlson and also Mr. Rickenbach is whether they would still be interested in rezoning this property even if this thing does not go down? Mr. Carlson replied, yes, he was going to refocus back on that as well. That would be beneficial long-term for the property, even if this falls apart and does not get done. Councilmember Varichak asked if any type of development on this site would have the same problem. Mr. Hickok stated the Mayor keyed in on an important point and that is, yes, in the traffic analysis, there were two solutions or more that would actually have access way to the western edge of this site. You get as far away from the intersection as you can. One of those suggestions even brought a drive up the hill from the Target driveway, past the restaurant, up the hill, and then serve those two uses at the corner from basically a service drive that comes up the Target drive. Now they understand where they have been on this and understand why they are closer to these solutions that everyone would find palatable. If you have to drive a long way to get there, you are not going to do it. That is how and why they have gotten to this solution. , Joe Rickenbach, Embersstated he and his wife have owned the Embers for 17 years. They have a thriving business with many regular customers. Embers has been part of Fridley for 57 years with 50 years on the spot where they are currently at. His main concern is, and always has been, that they keep their access the way it is now. Their access is pretty clear and easy. The project they have proposed is a big project. It is taking one business and turning it into three on a small site with a drive-thru. What they are asking him is to change his. He has a clear in and out right now. No issues at all. The left turn is not the greatest and it is an "F" and even when things change it will still be. However, people do like taking a left turn there. It is not everybody, but they do like the access to H65. They are asking him to change that basically into a parking lot for the driveway and to change the way his customers come and go. Mr. Rickenbach stated some people will say, “Joe, you have a lot of loyal customers, they are not going to be bothered by the changes, they are going to find you.” He would say, they have extra traffic, a parking lot and have to exit to the one side to take a left. They have a parking lot they are going to have to go through with people walking out three new stores, and they have a drive-thru entrance and exit. They have a brand new item up by his house that has three units. It is brand new with not a lot of development around there right now, but that drive-thru lane is busy all the time. He knows there is stacking and that is great, but it is busy all the time. It might be true some of his regulars may find him but, if people have a hard time getting out, they will not come back. Not to mention he has a lot of older customers, and the business of the new lot is not going to be easy for them also. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 13 Mr. Rickenbach stated his other real worry is resale value. In years to come, if they decide to sell down the road, how is it going to affect potential buyers. Right now if he was to sell they would have a great easement. Easy in and out, and great visibility. Is it going to change? It is probably going to make it harder to sell. Mr. Rickenbach stated, having said all of that, Alliant approached him. It would be awesome to have something new on the corner and make it look nicer. So they did come to an agreement, but it was the City that was adamant about not having it. Everybody has been really good to work with. However, the only one he is comfortable, although not that comfortable, but said he would do is where they would have two exits with ins and outs, both ways, left and right, even though that left is hard. It is a hard right now, but his No. 1 goal from the very beginning when Alliant came out is keeping his main entrance the same way. This definitely changes it. He knows they put a lot of time and effort into it, and he what they say; however, they are at a standstill at the moment. He thinks it will affect his business. This is his livelihood. This business has been here a long time, and it is important to him and his family. Mayor Lund asked Mr. Rickenbach, if this does not happen, would he still want the zoning change. Mr. Rickenbach replied, yes, he has talked to Mr. Hickok. . Mayor Lund asked Mr. Rickenbach, if he sees it as a benefit. Mr. Rickenbach replied, yes. He understands it and he knows they are here for zoning, but this is going to be a part of it. Mayor Lund asked Mr. Kosluchar, if 53rd Avenue was County road. Mr. Kosluchar replied no, it is a City street. Mayor Lund asked whether there has ever been any discussion about changes that might occur rd on 53 Avenue. Sometimes crossovers are eliminated. Would he like it if they create a median to eliminate the left turn altogether? That has happened before because the intersection is not ideal. He has been to Embers himself there, you either have to block the intersection or wait to time it and then you have people waiting behind to get out. Sometimes he has made a right turn even though he wanted to go left to get out on the highway. He is just wondering, because at some point they may change it so you cannot make the crossover in that intersection. Mr. Rickenbach asked Mr. Hickok to put the plan up that they originally agreed on. The one thing about this plan, right now there is the gas station is not near the traffic. The Starbucks FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 14 alone there would have a lot of traffic, let alone two other units. However, right now with the gas station, it is willy nilly how you leave because it is not defined. This plan would have two defined areas that would kind of compete a little bit, but what having that second spot does for his customers is it frees up, with all the heavy traffic, with having two of the same entrances and exits. To him it alleviates a little bit of the pressure of being able to turn left in one spot. Right now if you were coming by those businesses and you wanted to come out left, you would have someone coming out of the drive-thru. It is a mess no doubt about it. To him having two ins and outs both ways is kind of the only satisfactory proposal so far. Mr. Wysopal asked if changing zoning at all changes any of the storm water requirements for the site. Mr. Hickok replied, for any new development, there will be an analysis on the storm water and how it needs to be mitigated. However, zoning alone does not affect it. Redevelopment on this site will have its own storm water considerations but will not affect the storm water on Embers. MOTION by Councilmember Barnetteto close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 7:58 P.M. 5. Consider a Rezoning Request, ZOA #13-02, by the City of Fridley, to Consider Rezoning Property, Legally Described as Auditor's Subdivision 39, from C-2, General Business, to M-2, Heavy Industrial, Generally Located at 3720 East River Road N.E. (Ward 3) (Continued February 23, 2015). Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated staff had recommended rezoning this property back to M-2, Heavy Industrial, which seemed to be a more appropriate zoning for that location and for the future use of the site. Since that time, the property was sold to someone who is going to use it for a Hmong funeral home. Being that the property has now closed, the use is appropriate for the site, and they have plans to develop it, staff recommends withdrawing its rezoning request. The public hearing is to make known that the City was the petitioner and it is satisfied that there is now a use that will go on that site. The new owners plan on developing it this summer. Staff is requesting the rezoning be withdrawn. They will bring a resolution to Council at the next meeting. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if all they have to do is close the public hearing. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 15 Mr. Hickok replied, yes. Mayor Lund stated he has an issue with this and is going to bring it up. He is not ready to remove this from the table only because it is a separate issue. He feels offended. The City gave them all the courtesies from the Council's standpoint to continue this thing to allow this rather lengthy process for the bank to sell this property and leave the zoning as such. He was in agreement with staff rezoning it to what would be more befitting for that area. He was not trying to make it anti-business. He was happy to do that for them and then grant all these exceptions, only to find out about Item No. 6 on the agenda. This is a different issue, but they extended the City no courtesies. In fact, they avoided the City it seems like. His question is what if they do not remove this zoning request until they settle this other issue with the City. Mr. Hickok replied, he recommends they keep the issues separate. Be clear about the land use issue and act upon it with what he thinks is right from a land use perspective. Although the Mayor's comments are well stated and well taken, from a land use perspective, they do not want to blend the two issues. Mayor Lund stated it seems like they did. He understands what Mr. Hickok is saying. It is wrong for him to try and penalize them, but he is really upset with them that they continued on with a violation that seemingly does not have much clout and they can continue to violate or just ignore having storm water running into a sanitary drain for two plus years and do nothing about it. Mr. Hickok stated one element that makes it a bit more difficult now is that they have a new business that is ready to follow the rules and do whatever is necessary, and they now depend on the zoning that would cause staff to withdraw its request. Mayor Lund replied, he would be penalizing the new property owner. It is unfortunate he found out about this after the closing. He asked whether the closing occurred the same day as their last Council meeting. Mr. Hickok replied, it did not occur until later in the week. Mayor Lund stated, there again, they should have been notifying the City, and yet again they had to continue this thing for their benefit. The bank has left a very sour taste in his mouth to say the least. He would really like to have them in front of him tonight or he would like to negotiate with them with No. 6 later on. With that being said, he is going to go ahead to close the hearing if the Council so desires, but they have not heard the last of him on Item No. 6. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 16 Councilmember Bolkcom stated it was not the lender who requested the rezoning. It was generated by staff originally. Mayor Lund replied, absolutely, and he was okay with the staff rezoning it because it was the best use of that property in an area otherwise surrounded by industrial uses. If anything, it seems to him keeping the zoning is like spot zoning but it has already been there. They were very generous to them backing off from that proposal, giving them a lot of time to do that, and then in return what the City got was complete avoidance on an issue that they should have some benefits here. Councilmember Bolkcom stated then she would also question how come they did not hear about this other issue until it was in their agenda. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to close the public hearing. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:06 P.M. NEW BUSINESS: 6. Resolution Approving Waiver, Release and Covenant Not to Sue Regarding Discharge Fees for Property Located at 3720 East River Road in Fridley, Minnesota (Ward 3). Darin Nelson , Finance Director and Treasurer, stated the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Division (MCES) notified the City in June of 2012 about a suspicious discharge in their MCES 33-inch sanitary sewer line in the vicinity of 3720 East River Road. On July 2, City staff discovered the discharge of groundwater in the sanitary sewer system at that address. Upon inspection, staff did find the basement was flooded with groundwater that was draining in the floor drain leading to the interceptor. Staff did perform several flow tests and they did find at peak times water was flowing in about four gallons per minute and that obviously depends on the time of year. Mr. Nelson stated staff did notify a designated representative from Prime Security Bank on July 7 about the illegal discharge and indicated the problem needed to be corrected as soon as possible, and they would charge them for those sanitary sewer fees for the illegal discharge. In August, after receiving no response from Prime Security Bank, staff again spoke with Prime Security Bank and notified them that the flow rates had not changed and that the problem needed FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 17 to be corrected as soon as possible. The representative from Prime Security Bank indicated that he would speak with his superiors, and they would follow up and solve the problem at hand. Prime did nothing to correct the problem, and the illegal discharge continued through 2013. Staff again contacted Prime Security's representative in the summer of 2014 to discuss Prime Security's responsibility to correct the problem and to let them know, again, the City would be billing them for the illicit discharge. Finally, later in the summer of 2014, upon further inaction by Prime Security Bank, staff did bill them for two plus years of sanitary sewer service with estimated flow rates for that period of time. The City estimated different points of the year. They had done probably eight or so inspections of the property over that timeframe, taking different points of the year and different flow rates. Staff estimated what the flow would have been for that timeframe. Mr. Nelson stated, subsequently, upon receiving the bill, the bank did contact the City and were ultimately allowed to do a temporary fix. At that point in time, they had an agreement in place where it looked like it was going to be sold to a funeral home and the site would be demolished. The temporary fix was basically a plug into that sanitary sewer line, rather than being corrected with a complete fix which would have been an expensive fix at that point in time. Mr. Nelson stated when the bank got the bill, they contacted him, and he was stern with them, saying they were dragging the City along while they were trying to find a buyer for the property. The bank came back and said they did not necessarily have flow rates and they did not know exactly how much flow was going through there. There is not a flow meter in place. It is not like a water mater. The City can only estimate flow rates. Staff believes they estimated a fair amount, but there is little they can prove other than the City’s flow tests on various dates. Mr. Nelson stated Prime Security Bank came back to the City with an offer after the City had sent the bill. The City said no. The bank told him we would be hearing from its attorney. The City Attorney stated it looks like they are going to be battling them. Basically the bank sent the City a letter stating what their amount was. The City sent them a response saying, no, but was willing to take the amount of $6,000. The bank did come back and did accept that offer. The City is not happy with the dollar amount but it is something rather than nothing. Staff is happy to see the property sold. It is going to be a better site in the long run. With that $6,000 fee, in exchange the City will provide the bank with a waiver and a release and covenant not to sue them. In addition, Prime Security Bank is still responsible for the quarterly or current charges for storm water and base sewer fees for the period at the closing. They closed on the property February 25, and the billing cycle closed on February 28. So they had a vast majority of that billing cycle which amounted to $248. When they closed they did have $6,300 in an escrow account which is dedicated to resolving the issue. Before the closing, he did make sure the new owners were aware of this outstanding issue. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 18 Mr. Nelson stated upon approval of the Wavier, Prime will wire the funds to the City, and they should have those in the City's account as soon as they sign the papers. Staff does recommend approving the resolution granting the waiver, release and covenant in exchange for the fees. He does have a correction. On page 64, that is an excess page (there is no Exhibit A). Mayor Lund stated the $294.48 is the quarterly charge, but there was a few days prorated until the closing of the billing. Is that the basic one-quarter fee that every citizen, every household, would have to pay for water, sewer, and storm water? Mr. Nelson replied, that is correct. It is mainly the storm water charge. They are not on City water. They get their water from the City of Minneapolis. Mayor Lund stated this is for approximately two and one-half years which is ten quarters. Are those ten quarters also included in that $6,000? Mr. Nelson replied, no, they are not. They have been paying their quarterly charges. They just contested this additional charge. Mayor Lund stated they were being billed and were paying their quarterly amounts. As to the illegal discharge, is there not some penalty? Some governing body and who is that in this case? Is it the City? Met Council? Mr. Nelson replied, Mr. Kosluchar would be a better person to answer that. Mayor Lund stated it seems like the only action the City got out of them was after two years staff finally decided to send them a bill. They should have been sending them a bill shortly after, give them 30 days, and then say if you are not going to fix the problem then the City will go ahead and fix it and fine them and everything else. Mr. Nelson replied, to Greg Kottsick’s credit, he did have constant communication with the one representative who always kind of gave him the run around that they were going to fix the problem and were going to be on top of it. The City would rather have them fix the problem immediately than have to bill them for this illegal discharge. Mayor Lund asked if the City has a pretty standard format--if they do not pay, the City pays it and abates it. Mr. Nelson replied correct. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 19 Mayor Lund stated the City has a very good way of collecting from people who do not conform. It seems like a relatively serious issue to him. Mr. Nelson stated he and Attorney Erickson had a conversation about this a few weeks to a month ago along with Mr. Kottsick. Mr. Kottsick’s experience is that 99.9 percent of the time, other than this one instance, the homeowners or businesses have worked with the City and made the corrections. Mayor Lund asked what the City's first billing was to them that actually got them motivated to talk. Mr. Nelson replied it was a little over $12,000. Councilmember Bolkcom stated part of their issue is it has all been by telephone between one City employee and an employee of Prime Security Bank, and that employee left the employ of the bank. Mr. Nelson stated the representative of the bank has always given the City the run around, and responsibility was switched around and they had to talk to their superiors. The individual at the bank never really got back to the City and said he needed further documentation. The president of the bank said if he would have had some sort of written notification of this from day one, they would have gone in and fixed the problem. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she understands what the Mayor is saying; however, on the other hand, legally, it is hearsay in a sense. She does not understand why this has been going on for two years and with the rezoning, how come none of that ever clicked together. How many times was the bank in front of them, and no one ever said there was this issue going on. Mr. Nelson replied the discharge piece of that was a separate issue that is in operations and staff did know about it on the billing side. He said he was not exactly sure about the rezoning part. Councilmember Bolkcom stated they probably would not know about it but, if there is no paper and all telephone, they have learned something from this. Mayor Lund said, you expect them to be professional about it and the bank just looked the other way, under the guise that my representative does not really speak for the bank, but it never was run up the flagpole, and then the president gets involved when he sees a big bill coming in. Councilmember Bolkcom stated but they do not know what the representative did with it. It is similar to if suddenly Macy's says you owe $12,000 and you never got a bill. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 20 Mayor Lund asked if you do an illegal discharge, is there no course of action for illegal activity? Is there a fine? There should be some penalty. Darcy Erickson, City Attorney, replied there is the IDDE ordinance. It does not sound good to say this, but those are extraordinary measures. They are talking an abatement of a piece of property, going into a property and taking those sorts of actions. In Public Works there were always some assurances this would occur. They are also probably stymied by the fact that they do not have a certain guaranteed number of gallons that were passed into our system. At best, they are going off of period monitoring which is the best they could do under these circumstances. Mayor Lund stated he is not talking about how much they should charge them, because all they can do is estimate. He is talking about the continued violation that occurred for over two years. Is there no authority that can penalize them? A penalty to force them to take ownership in their problem and responsibility. Even with the closing, who says the new owner is going to take immediate action to stop the illegal discharge. They did do a temporary fix but only after the City sent them a large bill did they take notice. Regardless of how little or great the illegal discharge was is not his real point. It seems the onus is on the City to prove how much they illegally discharged. Attorney Erickson stated under the IDDE ordinance, there is probably the ability to prosecute it as a misdemeanor but she does not know if that gets the remedy you necessarily want in an expeditious manner either. It is a situation of City staff trying to work with the property owner who believes that the property would be closing. That is probably a way of securing payment and correction of the issue. Mayor Lund asked if they do not approve this which he is not happy about, then it goes to a court action, and they end up settling at something in between. Attorney Erickson replied, candidly, it is costly to try to prosecute or try to litigate this. This is a compromise perhaps and is the best they could craft out of the situation in which the City finds itself. Mayor Lund stated they are getting one heck of a deal under this scenario because it had to be significant to pick up the outgoing flowage of the storm water for it to even come to the City's attention. Mr. Nelson replied Met Council was looking at the BNSF interceptors. They were televising the main pipe and happened to run across this interceptor coming in. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 21 Councilmember Bolkcom asked if it could have been from several owners before this. Mr. Nelson replied it was probably when the power was cut off to that building. It had been vandalized many times. The sum pump then stopped running at that point. Councilmember Bolkcom stated it probably goes back to at least one owner before. The power was out for some time before it was foreclosed. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to adopt Resolution No. 2015-15. Seconded by Councilmember Barnette. UPON A VOICE VOTE, COUNCILMEMBERS BARNETTE, VARICHAK, AND BOLKCOM VOTING AYE AND MAYOR LUND AND COUNCILMEMBER SAEFKE VOTING NAY, THE MOTION WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY ON A 3-2 VOTE. 7. Special Use Permit Request, #14-07, by TCO Design, to Construct a Comprehensive Home Use in an R-3 Zoning District, Generally Located at 5300 and 5310 Fourth Street N.E. and Resolution Approving Special Use Permit, SP #14-07, for TCO Design, the Petitioner, on Behalf of A.P. Ventures with Authorization from BRP II, LLC, the Property Owner of 5300 Fourth Street N.E., and Security Bank and Trust, the Property Owner of 5310 Fourth Street N.E. (Ward 1). Scott Hickok, Community Development Director,stated the petitioner is seeking a special use permit to allow the construction of a comprehensive home care building. This was originally before the Planning Commission on November 19, 2014. Because of neighborhood and Planning Commission issues specifically related to parking, the petitioner waived State Statute Section 15.99, 60-day agency action law. Since that November Planning Commission meeting, the petitioner and representatives for the project have negotiated a purchase agreement with the owner of 5300 Fourth Street. The additional land area will allow for more on-site parking to address the concerns of the Planning Commission and the neighborhood. Mr. Hickok stated the new site plan incorporates those two parcels. The actual square footage of the building has been reduced in size, and an existing garage on the 5300 Fourth Street property will remain in place which will provide parking as well as room for garbage and recycling containers. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 22 Mr. Hickok stated the proposed building will still have three stories, with a maximum height of 35 feet, which is also the maximum height in a single-family district. Each level will have five separate bedrooms and the common area. The new site plan allows for 12 surface and 2 garage stalls for a total of 14 parking stalls. Mr. Hickok stated hospitals, clinics, and convalescent nursing homes are permitted special uses in the R-3 district. This is in an R-3 multi-family housing district. Based on Code requirements for a nursing home which is the most similar use to the comprehensive home care use, 8 parking stalls are required. The previous site plan did comply with Code requirements; however, as mentioned it was a concern to neighbors and the Planning Commission. Mr. Hickok stated the new site plan has been updated to provide a total of 12 parking spaces plus 2 garage stalls. This is 6 stalls above what the Code would require for a convalescent home. Mr. Hickok stated the second hearing was held on February 18. After receiving additional comments from neighboring property owners and clarification from the petitioner and staff regarding questions that came up, the Planning Commission recommended approval of this special use permit with eight stipulations. The recommendation was unanimously approved. Mr. Hickok stated City staff recommends concurrence with the Planning Commission. Councilmember Saefke stated he went there today, and after having read the minutes from the Planning Commission, he fails to see where any problem exists with the building being built there. There seems to be sufficient property and, if the entrance is in the alleyway, it is between Bona Brothers and the property and these two properties are right on the corner. The concern about additional traffic is not going to get beyond two properties if it gets that far because the main parking will be in the back. The next property down happens to be an apartment building as well. He believes that is a three-story. Mr. Hickok replied it is a two-story with a walkout. Councilmember Saefke stated the construction of this in that neighborhood does not seem to create a problem because there are others within this same area. This particular area in the City happens to be one of the older areas. There might have been some mixed uses there prior. This would not affect anything. As far as the shade is concerned, he has heard that before when Norwood Square was being built and when Brandes Place was being built. People were concerned about it wrecking their view, etc. His feeling on that was he would rather see a nice house or building than the back end of a development that has dumpsters and other accoutrements. It is his understanding as well that Bona Brothers will not be parking there any longer. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 23 Mr. Hickok replied that is correct. Councilmember Saefke stated he did see a couple of cars parked back there this afternoon. Mr. Hickok stated the site is quiet. They have taken advantage of hard surface, but they realize that is not their site and this development is going to occur. They will need to find a place for those employees. Councilmember Saefke stated it seems to him that having read the minutes, some people did not quite understand this is a building for people to recuperate in with some pretty serious illnesses or operations. He cannot really see a whole lot of partying going on nor can he see those people driving around. Councilmember Bolkcom stated this is a special use permit with the use of being a convalescent or nursing home, so the whole thing with the halfway house or anything like that, the special use permit goes with the property. It is not like someone can come in and make this a group home or a halfway house. Mr. Hickok replied correct. They tried to be as specific as they can. The City Code does not have the term "telemedicine," for example, in it. Staff picks the closest which is a convalescent facility. It is an area to recuperate. Some of the questions came up, where is the doctor’s stand, the nurse’s stand, etc. The petitioner will provide them more information about that tonight if they like. This is a new technology and not the last time they will see a facility of this type where the doctors and the people who are communicating on certain issues are not in the facility. They are communicating from afar. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they have heard anything else from the neighbors since the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Hickok replied they have not. Councilmember Bolkcom stated she read something recently about Bona Brothers and asked whether they need to be a little more diligent relating to parking and parking on the streets. She understands there have always been some parking issues with Bona Brothers with code enforcement. A lot of times you do not know there is a problem until someone tells them. Is there a better way to follow up on some of things related to special use permits and parking? Mr. Hickok asked are they talking specifically about parking issues at Bona Brothers the City needs to follow up on. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 24 Councilmember Bolkcom stated they have a special permit and part of the issue back when that was in front of them was if they had enough parking? It appears there have been some problems there. Is there enough parking for this new facility? There will be people coming to visit, the people who work there and the change of shift. Is there a better mechanism the City has where they can sort of reassure people that the City is watching this? Mr. Hickok replied they have a special use permit before them tonight. One of the concerns they heard from the Planning Commission and neighbors was about parking. The petitioner has taken an extraordinary step to buy a property next door. They met the Code with the property they had. They have bought a property next door to provide them a buffer in the event that has proven that if they need additional parking they have it. Mr. Hickok said one of the things people do not see from the outside relating to Bona Brothers is they have also taken extraordinary measures. They have now probably upwards into the $5,000 to $6,000 range in surveying costs. They had worked with the City to try and get the frontage road vacated. In fact Mr. Kosluchar came to the City and he was working on a street project down there and asked, do they fix that cul de sac or not? It looked like Bona Brothers has made provisions to have that vacated. The City was interested in having it vacated, and they were not even interested in fixing the cul de sac at that time if it was going away. The State really became the hurdle in there. Mr. Hickok stated to Bona's defense, what has happened here is the business has grown beyond the owner's expectations over time. He has bought a site in New Brighton for his large vehicles. He does deal with three very large clients in Fridley. One is BNSF, one is Plunkett's and one is Comcast. Three shift companies where after the third shift oftentimes they will leave their vehicle and be picked up by a co-worker. Bona's has hired somebody to shuttle those vehicles to the New Brighton site. Occasionally you might see one there because the third shift person got there, the 8 o'clock person is not in yet. However, as soon as he gets there to shuttle it, off it goes. Is it cause to call back the special use permit? They have taken extraordinary measures to try, in light of all the facts, to stay within the bounds of what the City's special use permit required them to do. At any point if Council thinks there is an issue or is getting complaints and there is cause to have them come back with the special use permit, please let staff know. Bona's is not at that point. They did take advantage of the fact there was hard surface behind them and a vacant spot to put employees because they are doing what the City wants businesses to do. They are growing. The City is meeting with them on a regular ongoing basis. Councilmember Bolkcom stated similarly there is a stipulation that staff will work with the petitioner and the neighborhood if it becomes an issue. Mr. Hickok replied absolutely. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 25 Councilmember Varichak stated Deb Skogen had come to the Planning Commission with some questions. Did all of her questions get answered. Mr. Hickok replied staff got back to her with answers to her questions. He thought she was pleased at the response and the fact the petitioner did hear the comments of the citizens and they did do something about that with the purchase of the property next door. Councilmember Saefke asked Mr. Hickok if he would explain to him what Exhibit A is about. Mr. Hickok asked the legal descriptions? Councilmember Saefke stated especially where it says, “subject to the reservation to the State of Minnesota in trust for the taxing districts concerned of all minerals and mineral rights in all of said property.” Mr. Hickok replied, some properties have that and these two properties do. At some point in time minerals rights were reserved on these properties. Mayor Lund asked if the property the petitioner bought was a non-conforming piece of property. Mr. Hickok replied, he would have to look to be sure but he thinks it met the minimum standards for the district. It is a bit peculiar in that it is a single-family in a multi-family district, but that was allowed by Code. Mayor Lund stated they are going to remove the house. Is it going to be green space? Todd Ofsthun , TCO Design, stated he represents AP Ventures. He stated they will provide a landscape plan. It will be green space. Mayor Lund asked if they were going to expand. Mr. Ofsthun replied, the hope is that things will go well with parking, etc. A future attached garage facility is kind of the wave of the future. Mayor Lund stated they are not going to increase or put in a Phase II or something because they have extra land. Mr. Ofsthun stated if it was possible, they would propose that in the future and go through this process again. The 15 beds is kind of a minimum with this type of facility. At this point, they FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 26 were not really interested in building bigger. They want to get in on the site, get the facility up and running, and do anything in the future down the road. They are a little stretched at this point. Mayor Lund stated if it was debated at the Planning Commission. Mr. Hickok stated there were questions about what goes on inside the facility. Mayor Lund stated one comment he heard from somebody right after the Planning Commission meeting was from a neighbor who thought it was going to diminish their property values, but they get that fairly frequently. Mr. Hickok replied he is always puzzled by that when you are talking about tearing down a house that might have a value of about $75,000 and bringing in $2.5 million worth of new investment. It is hard to imagine how you can see that bringing down your property values. It is not a 15-unit apartment complex or anything like that. It is a well-designed, architecturally correct building scale wise, and it has been designed to fit the scale of the neighborhood. Mayor Lund stated and then another issue about having more density; however, this was already zoned for R-3. Mr. Hickok replied that is correct. An 8-unit standard apartment building could go on this same site. Councilmember Saefke stated in taking a look at the house and garage that exists. He read they are going to keep that garage. Mr. Ofsthun replied, yes. Councilmember Saefke stated hopefully they are going to get different siding and roof on it which are compatible with the new building. Mr. Ofsthun replied yes, they will renovate it to match the new building. Councilmember Barnette stated he was out there today also and saw the same thing. MOTION by Councilmember Saefke to approve Special Use Permit Request, #14-07, by TCO Design, with the following eight stipulations: (1) The petitioner shall obtain all necessary permits prior to construction. (2) The petitioner shall meet all building, fire, and ADA requirements. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 27 (3) City engineering staff to review and approve grading, drainage, and utility plan prior to issuance of a building permit. (4) Landscape and Irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to issuance of building permit. (5) If on-street parking becomes an issue as a result of this use, the special use permit and options for additional parking shall be further reviewed by the City Council at the owner’s expense. (6) If the comprehensive home health care use changes, the special use permit shall be further reviewed by the City Council. (7) The petitioner shall file the necessary documents with Anoka County to combine th both of the lots involved in this project, 5300 and 5310 4 Street, prior to issuance of a building permit. th (8) The house at 5300 4 Street shall be removed within one year of issuance of a building permit for the new building. and Adopt Resolution No. 2015-16. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. Approve Agreement with Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. to Provide Phase 2 Site Improvement Design for the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Project (Ward 3). Jack Kirk, Parks and Recreation Director, stated the design and development are coming along very nicely. Within the next few weeks they should be presenting some plans to the City Council. He is here tonight with a proposal to have them consider an agreement with Hoisington Koegler Group for Phase 2 of the site improvement. Project Phase 2 would be the outdoor pavilion, the amphitheater, the plaza area. They are going to have an outdoor play area, some outdoor classrooms, and there would be trail connections and lighting and furnishings that would support those types of improvements. They think it is important that the Phase 2 and Phase 1 are blended together, and that they are integrated properly when it comes especially to the location of the facilities, the utilities, and where the trails are going to be. Hoisington Koegler are the landscape architects who are working with Partners and Sirny, as they are doing the design development for the building and the immediate surrounding area. Those two firms would be the two architectural firms that would work on Phase 2 of the project as well. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 28 Mr. Kirk stated he wanted to make sure they know the agreement they are looking at and the cost was not included in the budget he presented to them back in August. This would be over and above that. Therefore, he talked with the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation. They have a letter in their packet tonight. The Springbrook Foundation will have the money in hand, and they will pay for these architectural services. As to the Phase 2 design services, they have talked with Hoisington Koegler. They have come up with a not to exceed number. It is very likely it could be lower than that. That number is $66,225. They will bill them at an hourly rate. As they redesign and look at some of the things and the schematics that were done four years ago, it is possible some of those items could be at a lesser cost. The Springbrook Nature Center Foundation has agreed to pay for this. They see this as a needed function to keep moving on the SPRING project. He recommends the City Council approve the agreement with Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. to provide the Phase 2 site improvement design for the Springbrook Nature Center project. Councilmember Barnette stated on page 96, a letter from Malcolm Mitchell, states very clearly what Mr. Kirk said--that the City will be billed for an amount not to exceed $66,225. The critics say but you cannot spend City money. Mr. Kirk answers that by indicating it is understood that while the contract is with the City of Fridley, the payment of the fees for the services detailed in this contract will be the responsibility of the Springbrook Nature Center Foundation. He thinks that is important. Fridley City tax dollars will not be spent. Mr. Kirk stated the Foundation has been doing fundraising, and they do have the money for this. He talked with members of the Foundation and said it is time to move on this, and they said they have the money and are willing to support this. MOTION by Councilmember Bolkcom to approve the Agreement for Professional Services with Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. to provide Phase 2 site improvement design for the Springbrook Nature Center SPRING Project. Seconded by Councilmember Saefke. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. Resolution Designating Load Limits on City Streets in the City of Fridley, Minnesota. James Kosluchar, Public Works Director,stated what he is asking Council to approve is a resolution to avoid the annual requirement for load limit approval and just approve it for future seasons. The load limit timeframes are established by MnDOT and passed along to the County and City, and they conform to those timeframes. Rather than approve a resolution for streets FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 29 with load limits annually and publish it in a newspaper, they will find some savings by putting the map up on the website and allowing those who are concerned to contact staff.. Mayor Lund stated this does make more sense because those who have the concerns of load limits who carry heavy loads already know the formula that MnDOT has established. Mr. Kosluchar stated, finally, there is one paragraph in here as well that authorizes the Public Works Department to issue an overweight permit in the case of hardship. The City does have people who at times are building homes and during that time need to take delivery and created a requirement for that. With the analysis they did on the heavy vehicle loading earlier this year, staff is comfortable with establishing fees for those overages. Of course they would cover the estimated damage to the pavement. Councilmember Bolkcom asked if they include a map are there any other streets they might suddenly put on. Mr. Kosluchar replied, what they do is update this map annually, similar to what they have been doing with the resolution. As they find more information on soils and as traffic patterns change, those designations can be modified without repaving the streets. MOTION by Councilmember Saefke to adopt Resolution No. 2015-17. Seconded by Councilmember Bolkcom. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10. Resolution in Support of Legislation Establishing an Early Voting Process for Votes in Minnesota. Walter Wysopal, City Manager,stated this is an item the City Council has not taken any definitive action on or discussed publicly in the past, so he felt it was appropriate to present it to them and ask that they pass this resolution. This is a resolution dealing with what has been called “establishing an early voting process.” City staff has been analyzing this and it has also attended a committee meeting at the Legislature to promote it. The absentee ballot voting which the City has is the “no excuse” ballot voting which was implemented in 2014. In 2014, comparatively the City had a little bit lower turnout; however, it did have a higher absentee voting taking place. It did indicate to the City that this process does encourage more people to vote. FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 30 Mr. Wysopal stated the City conducts an in-person absentee ballot process. The County conducts a mail absentee ballot process. They have an absentee ballot process 46 days before each election. The City Clerk has identified there are 19 steps required for the in-person absentee balloting at the City level. The voters place those ballots in an envelope as opposed to putting them into a machine. There are additional steps taken at the County level to finish the processing, including counting the absentee ballots. Voters find this process somewhat cumbersome. There is some confusion about how it is done, and there are always security concerns about their ballots because they are placed inside an envelope. Mr. Wysopal stated compared to early voting, the County would continue that absentee process 46 days before each election. The City would then conduct an early voting process 15 days before an election. There would be 9 or 10 steps required for the early voting process compared to the other process. The voter places the ballot into that tabulator. The voter has the opportunity to correct the ballot if the vote tabulator returns the ballot. Then it provides the firsthand knowledge that the ballot was counted. It is really important for the voter to feel that. Mr. Wysopal stated the early voting process cuts the 19 steps down to 10. There are about 137 voting hours required and brings down that cost per ballot to about $2.51. The voter has firsthand knowledge the ballot was counted and the mail absentee process is still available to the County. Mr. Wysopal stated they are making the recommendation today based on that analysis that it would reduce the City costs and would make it more effective for the voters and perhaps increase the participation in the voting. The goal is to provide the accessibility, the efficiency, and the transparency in that process while providing a higher level of integrity and security. Mr. Wysopal stated staff is recommends Council adopt the resolution in support of the legislation. If the Council approves this resolution, the City would then forward that onto the appropriate agencies that are supporting this process. MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adopt Resolution No. 2015-18. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. ON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. Informal Status Reports Mr. Hickok stated Wednesday will be the first of four workshops on Columbia Arena for anyone interested in attending. This will be an opportunity to talk about Columbia Arena and FRIDLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2013 PAGE 31 what their vision of it should be and get their voice heard. It will be at the Community Center and the meetings start at 6 p.m. Each one has its own purpose. Make the commitment and be a part of all four meetings because one will build on the other. It will be a rewarding process. Councilmember Bolkcom asked Mr. Wysopal if he wanted to tell them about what was happening with Call on the Council. Mr. Wysopal replied the Call on the Council program which has been aired for many years will be coming to an end. They have been reviewing the effectiveness of the programs based on the fact that they do not get too many calls from people. The City survey that was conducted last year indicated that not many people utilize the program for updates. They are looking forward to presenting a new program in April that will provide updates similarly in the way Call on the Council did and also allow the City to do it more frequently and provide more in-depth analysis on some of the issues. ADJOURN: MOTION by Councilmember Barnette to adjourn. Seconded by Councilmember Varichak. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, MAYOR LUND DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:12 P.M . Respectfully submitted by, Denise M. Johnson Scott J. Lund Recording Secretary Mayor