Loading...
PLM 09/19/2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING September 19, 2018 Chairperson Kondrick called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: David Kondrick, Mark Hansen, Brad Sielaff, Leroy Oquist, Mike Heintz, and Rachel Schwankl MEMBERS ABSENT: None OTHERS PRESENT: Stacy Stromberg, Planner Amy Kempf, Neighborhood Preservation Specialist Julie Jones, Planning Manager Carole Mette, Sherman Associates Development, LLC Enrico Williams, Kaas Wilson Architects Steve Stone, Parsons Electric Janice Droll, Horizon Circle and Main Chad Erickson, 6101 Trinity Drive NE Pam Reynolds, 1241 Norton Drive NE Approval of Minutes: August 15, 2018 MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to approve the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Schwankl. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Rezoning, ZOA 18-04, by Sherman Associates Development, LLC, to rezone to S-2, Redevelopment District to allow the property to be developed with three multi-family buildings, including a market rate building, an affordable building, and a senior housing building. Development of this Property will also include a surface parking lot required for transit riders, generally located at 6050 Main Street. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat, PS #18-04, by Sherman Associates Development, LLC, to create separate lots for each portion of the proposed development, generally located at 6050 Main Street. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff to open the Public Hearings. Seconded by Commissioner Heintz. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Master Plan, TOD #18-01, by Sherman Associates Development, LLC, to meet the requirements of the overlay district, generally located at 6050 Main Street. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 2 of 22 MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff to open the Public Hearings. Seconded by Commissioner Heintz. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WERE OPENED AT 7:02 P.M. Stacy Stromberg , Planner, stated Carole Mette, of Sherman Associates Development, LLC, is requesting three land use items to allow for the development of the property generally located at 6050 Main Street and the surrounding unaddressed parcels. This area is the current location of the Northstar Commuter Rail East Fridley Station. The three land use items are: 1.Rezoning Request and Subsequent S-2, Master Plan – These properties are currently zoned P, Public because the City’s Housing and Redevelopment Authority is the property owner. To allow for development of the site, the petitioner is asking to have the properties rezoned to S-2, Redevelopment District. As part of that rezoning, a master site plan also needs to be approved for the site. 2.TOD Master Plan – These properties are within the TOD Overlay District, so a TOD Master Plan also needs to be reviewed and approved by the City Council before development can start. 3.Plat – In order to accommodate the development of the subject properties, the petitioner would like to create new lots for each portion of the development as well as a separate lot for the Metro Transit parking lot for the commuter rail. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner is asking for approval of the requested land use items to allow the construction of a 267-unit mixed income transit-oriented multi-family residential development. That is going to be through the construction of three buildings. Ms. Stromberg stated over the last year the City‘s HRA, since they are the owners of the property, have been meeting with Sherman and talking with them about developing this site. The site plan they have in front of them is the overall master plan that has been designed at this point. At the end of April the HRA entered into a contract agreement with Sherman. Ms. Stromberg stated during that time staff has also been talking with Metro Transit about reducing the required amount of parking. Currently they require 300 stalls to be dedicated to the Northstar and, after much review and lots of discussions; they have decided to reduce that number to 80. Ms. Stromberg stated Paul Bolin with the HRA is in the process of negotiating that lease and getting the new lease signed with the reduction in parking. Commissioner Hansen asked whether the 80 stalls were on both sides of the tracks? Ms. Stromberg replied, no, just on the east side. Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed development will be called, “Fridley Station Village”, and will consist of 3 buildings: 1.The market rate building will be 4 stories of living space with underground parking. It will have 96 multi-family apartment units that will include a mix of studios, 1, and 2 bedrooms. There will be 72 underground parking stalls and 42 surface parking stalls. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 3 of 22 2.The senior building will have 3 stories of living space with underground parking. It will have 100 units of independent living for those 55 and up. There will be a mix of 1 bedroom, 1 bedroom + den, and 2 bedroom units. There will be 119 underground parking stalls and 41 surface parking stalls. 3.The affordable building will be 4 stories of living space with underground parking. It will provide 71 units of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom options with 66 underground parking stalls and 43 surface parking stalls. This building will provide housing for those families earning below 60 percent Area Median Income (AMI). Ms. Stromberg presented a slide which shows the Commission what the median income would be. For a family of four, that would mean the family itself would have to earn $56,580 a year to qualify to live in that building. Commissioner Heintz stated, or less. Ms. Stromberg replied, yes, or less, so the income level depends upon the family size. Ms. Stromberg stated each building will provide modern amenities including balconies, in-unit washer and dyers, community rooms, fitness centers, etc., and the petitioner is also providing community features such as a clubhouse, an open-air pavilion, sidewalks and trail connections for everyone in the community to share. 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 law gives the City the authority to “rezone” property from one designated use to another, so long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Stromberg stated the Comprehensive Plan’s 2030 future land use map designates this area as “Redevelopment.” Based on the Northstar TOD Master Plan that was approved by the City in 2014, the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for Multi-Family and Public/Semi- Public” use, which supports approval of the proposed rezoning. If the rezoning is approved, any substantial change to the master plan for the site would require additional review by the Commission and the City Council. Ms. Stromberg presented a map showing the boundaries of the TOD District. In 2011, the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay District was approved. The subject properties are within the TOD Overlay District. Ms. Stromberg stated the purpose for the adoption of the TOD Overlay was to: A.Encourage dense, mixed use, pedestrian-friendly development within a one-half mile of the Northstar Commuter Rail Station in Fridley. B.Create multi-modal connections to the Fridley Northstar Commuter Rail Station that allow for safe access to the station no matter what means of transportation someone uses. C.Create a neighborhood identity with the Northstar Station that promotes the use of mass transit, human interactions, safety and livability. D.Reduce automobile dependency by locating a variety of land uses within one-half mile of the train station. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 4 of 22 E.Provide life cycle housing for people of different income levels and housing space needs within one-half mile of the train station. Ms. Stromberg stated in the Planning Commission’s packet there is a list of standards the petitioner is required to meet when their property is in the overlay district. Those standards relate to lot coverage setbacks and in the TOD they are looking for buildings to be closer to the street, so the setback is 15 feet from the property line. They are also looking for façade articulations and dimension to the building. Also, they are looking at landscaping and sidewalks, lighting, a development that creates a pedestrian feel and scale. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner has designed a project that meets the TOD standards that will enhance the development and achieve what the City and HRA were hoping to see with development of this land. Ms. Stromberg stated in order to accommodate the development of the subject properties; the petitioner would like to create 4 new lots for each portion of the development, including a separate lot for the Metro Transit parking lot. Ms. Stromberg stated Lot 1 will be for the Metro Transit parking lot and the Northstar east station building. It will be 88,484 square feet is size. Lot 2 will be for the market-rate building and will be 117,262 square feet in size. Lot 3 will be for the affordable building and will be 82,603 square feet. Lot 4 will be for the senior building portion of the development and will be 176,582 square feet in size. Ms. Stromberg stated creation of the new lots and legal descriptions will make it easier for Metro Transit to own their own parcel and to provide financing for each building type. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of the Rezoning to S-2, Redevelopment District, ZOA #18-03 and the TOD Master Plans, TOD #18-01, with stipulations as it meets the purpose of the TOD Overlay District; its proposed use meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan; and it provides additional housing opportunities, with the following stipulations: Њ͵ The property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan submitted for “Fridley Station Village”, page #C2-1, by Loucks, dated 8/17/18. Ћ͵ The exterior building elevations shall be developed in accordance with the architectural exterior elevations sheets submitted by Kaas Wilson Architects. Ќ͵ The petitioner shall meet all requirements set forth by: a.The Building Code b.The Fire Code c.The City’s Engineering Department – related to grading, drainage, storm pond maintenance agreement, utilities, and utility connection fees d.The City’s Planning Department – related to landscaping, signage, and the TOD Overlay Zoning District e.The Mississippi Watershed Management Organization Ѝ͵ All lighting in the development shall be shielded and downcast. Lighting shall be provided through free-standing lighting that adequately illuminates the sidewalk. Ў͵ All crosswalks shall be installed using a colorized pavement pattern when connecting the sidewalk on each side of a driveway. All connections shall be accessible. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 5 of 22 Џ͵ If the square footage of the footprint of any of the buildings proposed changes by more than 10% at that phase of the development, an S-2 master plan and TOD master plan amendment shall be required. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff also recommends approval of preliminary plat, PS #18-04. Chairperson Kondrick stated there are people in the audience that are likely not as familiar as the Commission as to what the TOD is. He asked staff to briefly explain what that means, what has happened because of that and how that complies with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Stromberg stated sure, the City worked very hard to get the train station site where it is. After they were able to get the station built in 2009, they went and developed this new language in the City Code allowing for this type of overlay district which they call a TOD. It is the ability to bring people closer to the train and allow them to not have to rely on their vehicles so much. The idea of it is to allow mixed use and in this case there is a mix of residential uses. It is also to create pedestrian-scale living with sidewalks and connections. The City has already put in a sidewalk along Main Street to create a path along Main Street so it is just another tool to help create a TOD development. Julie Jones , Planning Manager, stated not only can you live here at this location and easily take the train to work downtown Minneapolis, but, now, with the new bike lanes and bike path that is over the freeway on Main Street, it would be very easy for someone to live here and commute via biking to downtown Minneapolis because the MRT trail goes right into downtown. It is also only a short distance away from a very frequent bus service on University Avenue. There are a lot of features where this will make it a very easy place for people to live and not own a car or maybe get by with only one car in the family. Commissioner Sielaff asked as to the Comprehensive Plan they have approved certain affordable housing in the City. He asked where is the City as far as getting to that goal with the addition of this development? Ms. Jones replied, that is a very good point to make, that the City does have a quota from Metropolitan Council on affordable housing. She thought it was about 300 units by the year 2030. Certainly this is one of the sites the City had in mind as a location for affordable housing. Ms. Jones stated, also, affordable does not have to be at 60 percent of median income. There is an 80 percent of median, a 50 percent of median, and a 30 percent of median goal. The staff did not really break it out in the Comprehensive Plan as specific numbers, just as the overall affordability goal. Anytime a private developer can come in and provide affordable housing in the City is a good thing to help meet requirements, because then the City scores points to get funding for other projects. It is important every year for the City to show some progress towards bringing more affordable housing to the community. Ms. Jones stated even though the City has an abundance of affordable housing, they still have a need for more, because not every person coming into the community is wealthy. They have new residents moving in all the time, and some of them need affordable housing. Commissioner Sielaff asked with this project then what percentage is the City at? Are they at 90 percent or 80 percent towards the goal? Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 6 of 22 Ms. Jones replied, she does not have that exact number with her but she could provide it later. Commissioner Ostwald asked, who manages the residents who are living in there to make sure they meet the requirements? Is it the owners of the building and then the City verifies that for its reports? Ms. Jones replied, the City will not have involvement in that; that is a requirement of the owner. Commissioner Sielaff stated this was intended to be a multi-use originally which also could have been commercial, correct? Ms. Jones replied, yes. Commissioner Sielaff asked are there other parts of this area that could be developed commercially still or will they be using up the whole TOD area here? Ms. Jones replied, this proposal does use up the entire area. There is other potential for development on the west side of the station, which the Metropolitan Council owns. Commissioner Heintz asked during construction how much of an impact will it have on the parking? Will they keep a good portion of the parking available for the site? Ms. Jones replied, it is her understanding they have to maintain a certain level of parking availability during the project. Carole Mette , Sherman Associates Development, LLC, stated they will notice in their packets that since they had sent that in, they had made a couple of improvements to that main market rate building on the st corner of 61 Ave and Main Street. They wanted that to really be the feature architectural entrance. Ms. Mette stated the project it will be developed, owned, and managed by Sherman Associates. They have a whole team of management site operations, facilities, development. They manage over 6,000 apartments, four hotels, and 600,000 square feet of commercial space. Also, as to the question on the affordability and who monitors that, they have a whole team of compliance specialists who will monitor that. There are certain tax forms they have to fill out and actually show the proof that these people for every single year are meeting those income requirements. Ms. Mette stated some other project partners include Kaas Wilson Architects, Loucks is their civil engineering firm, Frana Companies will be their general contractor, and Alliant is their surveying group. They have also been working with the City of Fridley HRA as the property owner. They have been working with Metro Transit and MHFA which administers the tax credit program and is the program that allows for the affordable development to take place. Ms. Mette stated also with regard to the comment about Metro Transit, their plan would be to really sit down and discuss with them, in terms of construction phasing and staging, what their needs are and if they need to work around things, they will. Ms. Mette stated their vision for the site is really meeting the needs of the whole community, a multi- generational, transit-oriented development that will encourage alternative transportation. This is Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 7 of 22 encouraged by having ample sidewalks and landscaping and greenery around the site. They really want to make it enjoyable for the residents and for anyone who may use to site to walk to the station. Ms. Mette stated what is unique about this site with there is a spot in the middle of the site where they are creating a central community space for all of the apartment users to share and it will create a sense of community. All the projects will have high-end finishes and underground parking as well. Ms. Mette stated as to some of the specific features that will be in each portion of the project are balconies or patios on every unit, modern appliances and lighting, and in-unit washers and dryers. The affordable building will have all the amenities the other buildings have; it will not be obvious to anyone walking in that building that it is the affordable building. Ms. Mette stated some other items they will feature are gardening beds; this will be a great feature for the senior project. Community and fitness rooms tailored to each building. There is the central community clubhouse and green space area for everyone to share, but on top of that each building will have its own community and club rooms, their own fitness rooms, there is business centers, and the senior project might have a craft room. Every project still has its own amenities in addition to the common clubhouse. Ms. Mette stated they will have pet-friendly communities and lots of different outdoor features, including grills. There will be a playground, a pavilion area, and also some water features at each project as well. Ms. Mette stated they’ve had meetings with Metro Transit and also the City of Fridley staff on the overall site plan. The goal is to meet the parking needs, and the TOD districts regulations to create a development the City is excited about. Enrico Williams , Kaas Wilson Architects, stated they have a long history of working various projects around the metro area and Sherman Associates on transit-oriented type developments. The master plan before the commissioner tonight is the culmination of many hours of work. They have worked with the Metro Council and the City and are very pleased with where things have landed with this design they see before them today. Mr. Williams stated their intent is to create this true transit-oriented district. They placed the buildings in a way to create a sense of space. The buildings themselves are tight to the local streets and the setbacks are pretty minimal. However, what it does is it defines a central space within the district itself. For each building they focused on using a consistent architectural pallet. The pallet itself is a little contemporary, a little muted; but they tried to use some different materials on each building to give each building a sense of its own identity and character and also a way of sense of place. Mr. Williams stated the Metro Transit parking lot is located north and adjacent to the Northstar line which was intentional. They envision a lot of regular commuters with the train to be able to get to the Northstar station with a short walk. However, each building entry is located internal to the site. That is meant to create a sense of place and way finding throughout the site. Chairperson Kondrick stated Ms. Mette mentioned at the beginning of her presentation that the market rate building has some changes. Can Mr. Williams elaborate on that? Mr. Williams replied, yes, the changes are architecturally related to the exterior of the market rate building. Their intent is to break it up in various ways so it is not just a straight run of a façade. They Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 8 of 22 intend to break up the façade by creating these bays and bump outs that break it up in smaller masses. They use strategic locations of brick to continue to break that up the façade around the building. Commissioner Hansen asked whether there were any considerations for soundproofing given the tight setbacks to the road and, of course, the railroad on the opposite side of the senior building? Mr. Williams replied, they do have units that are facing the train. The opinion is that getting a view of the train is pleasing to some particular type of resident and usually for the windows facing this side they do have a higher STC rating for those windows. The sound impact you then get from the train is lessened. That building is kind of a sound barrier in and of itself for the other buildings, so those building will have less of a need for those higher STC-rated windows. Commissioner Heintz asked whether people will be able to drive through the Transit parking lot into the other parking lot? That seems like it would be a lot of traffic if you are going to have a lot of kids within the development. Mr. Williams replied, there is and the crosswalks have been defined. They do have pedestrian paths, but the intent is to keep these paths continuous. They did their best to simplify things but tried to reduce the amount of straight runs in different ways. The intent is to calm traffic. They do not want people barreling through parking lots. Commissioner Hansen asked, do they have also or would they considering putting in charging stations for electric vehicles as part of the site plan? Mr. Williams replied, that is a discussion they would have with the owner. They have been doing it on more and more projects that usually have 60 units. In those cases, 1 or 2 is usually sufficient; but that is a discussion they are continuing to have. Ms. Mette stated what they would like to do is see how the market reacts and where the demand is. Those charging stations can easily be added. In the future each stall in the whole garage can have a charging station, as they are easy implement if needed down the road. Also, another thing they are starting at a couple of their existing sites is the car-sharing program. That is something they will consider here too especially given that it is in this TOD area, and they will see how that kind of works out. There are different companies out there that help facilitate a car-sharing program. Commissioner Oquist asked if they have other projects similar to this in the cities? Ms. Mette replied, they do. One is about to break ground in October at the Coon Rapids Northstar Station. That is actually how the Fridley project came about, because they were working on the Coon Rapids site and asked if there was potential development anywhere else along the Northstar line. They also have a number of other operating apartment projects. If the Commission is interested in going to look at some, she would be happy to send a list of some to Stacy. Commissioner Sielaff asked whether they develop and manage all of these? Ms. Mette replied, yes, they have in-house managers. They have over 400 employees, with a majority of those being property management personnel and operations. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 9 of 22 Commissioner Heintz asked when they begin to design the playground area he would suggest they talk with Jeff Jensen, the City’s Parks Superintendent for ideas and assistance. Ms. Mette replied, that is great, they will talk with him. Steve Stone , Parsons Electric, stated he is representing Parsons Electric which is the property directly to the south of this area. He realized they are looking at a master plan rendering of the project and their question is will there be some kind of privacy fence between the project and their property. They would like to see something that would stop criss-crossing pedestrian traffic from going through their property and parking lot. He wants to make sure the residents use the on the sidewalks and don’t cut across their property. Commissioner Oquist stated he had the same thought that people could park in Parsons Electric parking lot and walk across to the new development. They do need to put in some sort of privacy fence. Janice Droll , 136 Horizon Circle, asked what would be the timeline if the rezoning passes? Chairperson Kondrick asked if she was wondering when they will start construction? Ms. Droll replied, right. The rezoning would have to pass and then what would be the timeline? Ms. Mette replied their plan is to start in the spring with construction and then construction would take about a year. Chad Erickson , 6101 Trinity Drive NE, stated he does not see any stoplights in the picture but he assumes they will be there. She asked Ms. Mette how long ago did she approach Fridley? Ms. Mette replied, she is a fairly new with Sherman Associates but she believed it was almost two years ago they originally began discussions with the City of Fridley. Mr. Erickson asked if any other developers were invited? Was there a bid process? Chairperson Kondrick stated that usually is not how it works. Somebody comes to the City, and if they like the idea, they can submit an application, but he asked Ms. Stromberg about it. Ms. Stromberg stated this is a project that the HRA has gone through the negotiation and development contract with. The City itself does not get on board until the application like this comes in. They did not go out for RFP’s or anything on this development. Sherman had approached the City’s HRA about the development. Mr. Erickson stated he likes Sherman more and more. He does have a concern related to where the curb cut is for the access on the north of the site because it is kind of a blind spot. His son was in one of the three school bus accidents right there and one of those accidents was a head-on collision. It is just really not a great point of access. He would like to keep his sunsets but that will go away, so why not build higher? Why stop at four when they could get specs to go five or six floors and meet the quotas. Mr. Erickson asked, why not drop it to like 30 percent income ratio? If they are wanting a multi- generational development with regard to the demographic maybe the view of the train is best for those with dementia. For a true multi-generational approach, he thinks it’s we should consider something like Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 10 of 22 his wife is launching in Wayzata where there is senior housing tenants that meet with children. If we want to rezone this for, a daycare could be included and while we’re at it maybe we should discuss education based on bringing in lots of mixed income dwellers for schools that really seem to already be at capacity. Somebody tonight said this is a wealthy city, and our school kids are about 75 percent or 80 percent on reduced or free lunches. Mr. Erickson stated you know two years ago Sherman approached the City and he got a letter about this three weeks ago. Maybe the City should invite some other perspectives to the table and consider what kind of other zoning might be beneficial to the community, especially on his street where he is the block captain. So if the City’s police reach out to him to help solve problems, they will now need three block captains to help solve problems because this development is inviting more problems. However, he is a bit inspired. Mr. Erickson stated there is no reason to keep families with multiple children around if really they are faced with more of this. The son who was in the accident with the bus, he is the only child of his four that he will even let attend Fridley schools anymore. With that in mind he is a bit inspired and encouraged to more aggressively pursue housing elsewhere. Take his family and possibly turn his home into its own market rate affordable housing property at Trinity Drive. Mr. Erickson stated if they could tell him when they could look at some other options, get some more voices in here that would help. Chairperson Kondrick asked Mr. Erickson, when he says other options, is he suggesting other developers? Mr. Erickson replied, other developers, other ideas when they talk about family-friendly Fridley. Commissioner Heintz stated it was not the City that went out and picked Sherman. Sherman created the opportunity and made a deal with the HRA which is a different entity from the City. Sherman created the opportunity, the idea, the vision; and submitted that idea to the HRA and City. Mr. Erickson stated if the HRA is managing this property, why does he have city council members showing up at his house saying they tried to reach out. He thought it was Metro Transit he needed to deal with related to security concerns of tree growth, shrub growth, and unintended growth. Mr. Erickson stated the HRA is its own organization as he understands, and he understands very little about how these relationships work. This is a wonderful mix of stuff and people do not know what is going on and everything is really upside down. All he has to do to keep a sign in his neighborhood that has key words like, crime, to not get a third block captain. He is trying to figure out some of this because this does not bode well for families but, friendly Fridley works for any demographic and that is a sincere remark. He is happy to market Fridley in any way he can, whatever face it chooses to put on itself. So they will see where this goes. Mr. Stone asked if it’s the purpose to develop the whole property at one time or in phases? Ms. Stromberg replied, as far as she understands it will be phased. Mr. Stone asked whether it would be over a period of years? Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 11 of 22 Ms. Mette replied, they technically have really two phases here as it relates to their development agreement with the HRA. The first phase is the market rate and senior, and the affordable project is technically phase two and that is because there is a stipulation in the development agreement that if they are not awarded the low-income housing tax credits they have applied for, then that project cannot go forward. They find that out in October so very soon they will know and they anticipate to qualify for the program so they are not too concerned. If they get awarded the tax credits in October then all of the phases will be constructed together yet there will be some month-to-month phasing. They will not go up at the very same time; however, they will be constructed together for the most part. MOTION by Commissioner Schwankl to close the Public Hearings. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARINGS WERE CLOSED AT 7:59 P.M. Commissioner Oquist stated it sounds like a good plan for that piece of property. It is well thought out and will be a benefit to that area. Chairperson Kondrick stated he thinks so too. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist approving Rezoning, ZOA 18-04, by Sherman Associates Development, LLC, to rezone to S-2, Redevelopment District to allow the property to be developed with three multi-family buildings, including a market rate building, an affordable building, and a senior housing building. Development of this Property will also include a surface parking lot required for transit riders, generally located at 6050 Main Street. Seconded by Councilmember Heintz. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff approvingPreliminary Plat, PS #18-04, by Sherman Associates Development, LLC, to create separate lots for each portion of the proposed development, generally located at 6050 Main Street. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff approving a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Master Plan, TOD #18-01, by Sherman Associates Development, LLC, to meet the requirements of the overlay district, generally located at 6050 Main Street. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist amending motions for Public Hearing Nos. 1 and 3 to include the following stipulations including a new stipulation requiring a privacy fence be installed on the south side of the property: Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 12 of 22 1. The property shall be developed in accordance with the site plan submitted for “Fridley Station Village”, page #C2-1, by Loucks, dated 8/17/18. 2. The exterior building elevations shall be developed in accordance with the architectural exterior elevations sheets submitted by Kaas Wilson Architects. 3. The petitioner shall meet all requirements set forth by: a. The Building Code b. The Fire Code c. The City’s Engineering department – related to grading, drainage, storm pond maintenance agreement, utilities, and utility connection fees d. The City’s Planning department – related to landscaping, signage, and the TOD Overlay Zoning District e. The Mississippi Watershed Management Organization 4. All lighting in the development shall be shielded and downcast. Lighting shall be provided through free-standing lighting that adequately illuminates the sidewalk. 5. All crosswalks shall be installed using a colorized pavement pattern when connecting the sidewalk on each side of a driveway. All connections shall be accessible. 6. If the square footage of the footprint of any of the buildings proposed changes by more than 10% at that phase of the development, an S-2 master plan and TOD master plan amendment shall be required. 7. A privacy fence shall be installed on the south side of the property. Seconded by Councilmember Heintz. Ms. Mette stated as to the fence she thinks that is a great comment and is something they do want to address. She asked if the language could be added to either have privacy screening of some sort through a hedge or landscaping? Commissioner Oquist stated the problem with that is it does not keep the people out. Chairperson Kondrick stated the hedge will not. Commissioner Oquist stated he understands what Ms. Mette is saying but they need to consider some kind of privacy fencing on the property because that is where these folks park and are going back and forth. Ms. Mette replied, she understands. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Text Amendment, TA #18-02, by the City of Fridley, to allow the code on Exterior Storage to be applied to an entire property and not just what is seen from the public right- of-way. MOTION by Commissioner Heintz to open the public hearing and remove it from the table. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 13 of 22 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED AT 8:06 P.M. Julie Jones, Planning Manager, began the staff presentation by explaining in general terms how City staff does code enforcement. Ms. Jones stated staff takes complaints. They hired Amy Kempf almost two years ago, creating a full- time neighborhood preservation specialist position. The City has had a full-time code enforcement officer in years past. After trying to do code enforcement without that position for a number of years, the City Council really wanted to get back to having a full-time person dealing with this as their sole function of their job. Ms. Jones stated Ms. Kempf takes complaints via phone, the councilmembers, other staff, and the website. Responding to complaints is primarily all Amy can get done. She tries to systematically go through neighborhoods but they learned her first year that it is difficult to complete much more, so this past summer, they did bring back the City’s summer intern position to do systematic inspections through the City. Ms. Jones stated they focused primarily on residential property, because they do not have as many violations it seems with commercial/industrial property. However, that is a lot for a summer person to take on in a 13-week internship. They spend the first week or two training them, and the last two weeks they have to wrap up the cases they have. They have just a few weeks for them to try and inspect almost 12,000 residential properties. This past year they tried to get to some of the commercial/industrial properties. The City has over 400 of those to inspect, and they got started on that towards the end of the internship. That is how staff manages the code enforcement cases they have. Ms. Jones stated while it is rare, staff has unresolved rear yard junk yard situations that they cannot do a lot with under the current Code language. The City gets a lot of complaints on those few cases they have, because complainants feel City staff is doing nothing to resolve the case, but staff is doing what it can within the confines of the Code. Ms. Jones stated this has come forward because the City Council has been quite frustrated with it. In fact staff stepped back and met with the City Council at their last workshop after the experience at the last Planning Commission meeting to check in and make sure we are on track with how best to resolve this problem. It was very clear in staff’s conversation with Council that they do want staff to continue to bring this text amendment forward. Ms. Jones stated exterior storage is by far number one on the top 10 list of complaints they get in code violations they deal with. Every year, when staff completes yearend reports, exterior storage is the top violation. Most cases are for minor things. In fact most of their cases are resolved after the first letter is sent. About 75-77% are resolved with just one notice. Ms. Jones stated unresolved exterior storage cases are primarily resolved through abatement. It is very rare they would do a misdemeanor court citation for this. They may issue a citation in an attempt to resolve a chronic hoarding problem. Most cases are resolved by conducting an abatement, where the City hires a contractor to clean up the mess, they bill it to the owner of the property, and that cost of abatement Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 14 of 22 (including staff time in managing the whole case) is billed to the property owner. They get 30 days to pay the bill. They can opt to pay for the costs of the abatement and get their stuff back (at least anything that is of value is put in storage). If they do not pay that bill, then the cost gets assessed to their taxes. The City always gets their money back on these cases. Ms. Jones stated as to the process of letters, the City’s policy is they send a first letter. When it is an exterior storage violation, people get 15 days to clean it up. They will typically send a second letter, a reminder letter, which gives the owner an additional 5-days timeline to clean up that property. Ms. Jones stated if the case is still not resolved after that, then they send what is called an abatement letter, which gives the owner another 20 days to clean up. She wanted to make it clear that people get a minimum of 40 days to clean up these cases, before the City comes in and cleans up. Unless this is the fourth case of this type the City has had with the same property owner, then they will act more quickly. Ms. Jones stated that staff can issue a criminal citation if they feel an abatement is not going to be enough to resolve the problem, but that is rare that they do that on exterior storage cases. Ms. Jones stated under the current Code language, a property owner has the option to remove the junk that is in a yard, or they can put it inside a building, or they can move the material in their back yard so it is at a point where staff cannot see it from the public right-of-way. Their neighbors can still see it, but City staff cannot see it from the public right-of-way. Ms. Jones stated people can also build a screening fence. She felt that is the downside of the existing Code language, because staff does not want people to just fence in their junk, because oftentimes fences do not make good neighbors; Keeping your yard looking nice for your neighbors to see makes better neighbors. Ms. Jones stated there are very few cases where there is outside storage in the backyard and staff cannot already see outside storage in the front yard. Often it is the whole yard that is a mess, and oftentimes when staff comes in and does an abatement for the front yard; they clean up the whole yard. The City has a legal right to go in the entire yard once they are abating material in the front yard. It is not common that it is just the front yard that is a problem. People who do not have enough room in their garage or their shed for their stuff, it usually starts spilling out everywhere, not just in the back yard. Ms. Jones stated the proposed change is for those few cases where that is not the case. Such as the one in the picture she is presenting. They were storing stuff behind the dumpster enclosure chronically; but it got to the point where it was all over in the front yard. Ms. Jones stated the topic of private v. public nuisances, which Pam Reynolds brought up at the last hearing, is tough to explain. This is a requirement in State Statutes that staff has to consider every time they are dealing with one of these cases. Each case is unique. How the State Statute defines the difference as a public nuisance is one the City can do something about, and a private nuisance the City cannot. Ms. Jones stated a public nuisance needs to affect a considerable number of people which is the exact language in the Code. Staff always struggles, however, with what is a considerable number of people? If it is just one property that has a neighbor behind them who can see it, staff might not see that as a “considerable” number of people. But then they have to look at the other components in the public Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 15 of 22 nuisance – is it violating that neighbor’s public rights to have to look at this junk yard in their neighbor’s yard. Is it producing an injury to them? Ms. Jones stated most of the complaints the City gets when people are frustrated is when they are selling their house. Potential buyers are coming and looking at their house for sale, are looking out the window, and saying, “What is the deal with the property next door?” People are calling up the City and saying, can’t you do something about this, because I can’t sell my house? There are cases where it is producing an injury to people that they cannot sell their house because of this mess next door. Ms. Jones stated another test is, does it annoy the public? It can be noise issues. It can be odor issues. It can be rodent issues. Wild animals are attracted to live in the stuff being stored in the yard, where staff can say the junk is an annoyance or producing an injury. Staff has to look at all these factors and the problem has to be able to be considered a violation of City Code to be considered a public nuisance. Ms. Jones stated as nuisance issues, staff gets complaints regarding a lot of private nuisances that maybe only affects one person or a few people. Often, it is a private matter that only those private parties can resolve or it is not an extreme enough Code violation for staff to support it legally and have the City get involved and resolve the situation. Maybe somebody does not like that their neighbor has lots of dandelions in their yard and never trims their shrubs. The Code requires you to keep your grass below 10 inches in height, but it does not require you to keep your yard looking pretty. That would be a private nuisance where the two parties would probably have to resolve it themselves. Ms. Jones stated she knows it is difficult to distinguish so she wanted to give them one real example staff dealt with a number of years ago. She showed pictures of a property back yard. There was a barbeque grill, some sand bags, a cooler, a garbage can, and a stack of cardboard in the yard - nothing staff would consider a health hazard, But it was the swimming pool in the backyard that had not been functioning for years that had a cover on it with a thin layer of stagnant water that neighbors were concerned was a mosquito harborage that caused staff to consider this situation a public nuisance, and the City came in and cleaned up the property, which was a foreclosure and had been sitting empty for a while. Ms. Jones stated she hoped that explanation helped regarding distinguishing what is a public nuisance. She explained that staff has to deal with this distinction with the current Code language and will need to continue to pass that test under the proposed language. Commissioner Heintz stated last month he was not against this Code, etc. but when the City creates Code and ordinance, they have to make it clear. According to the way it was written, the only thing you could have in your yard was stacked wood. That is the part that was problematic. Okay, he cannot have a trampoline in his backyard because that could be considered a Code violation because the only thing he can have in his yard is firewood neatly stacked. That is the portion that he had a problem with. He is all for getting front yards and back yards cleaned up. He does not have a problem with that. He does not have a problem with a neighbor asking the City to come in. They need to have it defined to some extent so that, the staff knows what they wrote into it, but okay the trampoline is in violation. They have to write them up and send them a letter to take it down. That is not what he was asking, to give him a whole list as to why it has to be done. He likes the language much better now. It is much better and that is all he was asking for. Make it clear so that down the road, when the current staff is not here, somebody else understands what they intended. Ms. Jones stated that is exactly what Ms. Kempf is going to address as she continues the presentation. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 16 of 22 Amy Kempf , Neighborhood Preservation Specialist, stated they really appreciated the feedback at the last meeting on August 15. They took what they said into consideration. Feedback is a very important tool when they are looking at City Code that is going to affect the public. Originally they did intend for the words, outdoor storage, to be the point of what could be stored in the yard; but it is reasonable that it is not clear what outdoor storage is. Of course they did not want to make a list because you are always going to leave something out of that; however, at the end of the day they have to consider toys, landscaping materials, things that make your property livable so people are able to use it. Ms. Kempf stated they really just wanted to avoid a list so they came up with something they thought was a good in between. Having something that is not too confusing as they wanted staff and citizens to be able to look at the Code and clearly understand what is there. If they were listing everything it could go on forever and would be just very confusing. Ms. Kempf stated the first part of the new Code explains the all exterior storage and materials, equipment, and vehicles in the zoning district are prohibited except as permitted. The “except as permitted” is followed by three parts: (a)Split and neatly stacked firewood in the side or rear yard. (b)Private outdoor recreational equipment, landscaping materials, and machinery currently being used or intended for use on a current project within the premises. (c) Boats, non-motorized camping trailers, and empty utility trailers in the side or rear yard. Boats, non-motorized camping trailers, and empty utility trailers stored in the front side or rear yard are not required to be located on a hard surface drive and must be setback at least 15 feet from the back of the street curb. This is what they felt was said at the last meeting and wanted to show residents what they could have as staff was trying to be reasonable and accommodating with this. Not just letting citizens have firewood. Part of that with the firewood is it does need to be split and neatly stacked. Part of this is they are avoiding things that could harbor animals, could attract rodents. They see that a lot of times where people will complain there is a giant pile of brush. As they see in the photo she is presenting there is snow on this pile that has been just sitting there. They do not want anything that is becoming a nuisance. Ms. Kempf stated for Section (b) it is private, outdoor recreational equipment. Landscaping materials, and machinery currently being used or intended for use on a current project within the premises. They did not feel it was important to say, a current project, otherwise someone could just say, oh, I do plan on doing that in the future. They do not know when the future is going to be, but if you have a rake out by a leaf pile and she as an inspector driving by, it is clear to her that someone is raking their leaves right there, and she is not going to send them a letter. That would be unfair. Ms. Kempf presented some pictures showing what they would be looking for. The leaf bags are in the middle of the snow which was in February. This is something, too, like Ms. Jones said staff has sent them multiple letters to try and get it removed. A bike is something a lot of houses have and leave out. Of course they are not going to write up a children’s bike but, when they see a trailer that is full of rusty bikes that is just sitting there, that again would be a violation. Ms. Kempf stated leading into trailers, the third section would be boats, non-motorized camping trailers, and empty utility trailers in the side or rear yard. The trailers and the boats do also need to be parked on a Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 17 of 22 hard surface in the front yard, and this is to prevent from erosion. These pictures again are examples of what they would be looking for, and the trailers in the side or the back yard are full of items that are clearly, again, being stored there. That is what they are trying to prevent. Trailers of course can be used for transportation, but when they have items stacked up on there for a long time. Sometimes they see boats being used for storage. Yard bags and boats and things that are sitting in the back yard for months at a time. Ms. Kempf stated, finally, she really wanted to emphasize they are not going out and looking in back yards when they have the systematic inspections. They are not going to be peeking through fences or anything. This Code changes for when they get the complaints, such as, I cannot sell my house. I have been looking at my neighbor who has had piles of rusty items and scrap metal in their back yard for three months now. That is when staff will go out and look if the complainant will let staff use their back yard. Sometimes they don’t want staff to and then staff cannot help them if they are unwilling to cooperate with that. However, they do need the team work. This is not going to be something where staff is going out and trying to get people. Ms. Kempf stated they are recommending the Planning Commission approve this text amendment and provide recommendation for the City Council on this new language for Text Amendment #18-02 and, if approved, tonight they would bring this to the October 8 City Council meeting. Commissioner Oquist stated in each one of these categories Ms. Kempf talks about non-motorized camping vehicles. What about motor homes? Motorized camping vehicles? What is the ordinance? Or is that on a different one. Ms. Kempf replied, for motorized camping that would be something parked in your front yard on a paved surface so the oil is not leaking in the back yard causing erosion. Commissioner Oquist asked, but the City does not address that in this ordinance? Ms. Stromberg replied, not in the Zoning Code. It is addressed in Chapter 506 of the City Code. Commissioner Schwankl stated she really likes what staff came up and appreciates they took kind of all of their comments and thoughts into consideration. Pam Reynolds , 1241 Norton, stated she would say it is a nice try at making the ordinance right. Again, she wants to point out there is a huge difference between a private nuisance and a public nuisance and here is why she is going to point that out. She was at the pre-meeting the other night with the City Council and in that meeting, Councilmember Bolkcom asked if her wheelbarrow can be stored under her deck. Scott Hickock said, no, it would be an outside storage violation. Here’s the deal. It is not unless you change this language. If you change this language, anything stored up there is up to them. Ms. Jones says they are not going to go looking for the stuff. However, if your neighbor complains about what they have to see, again, let her remind them, there is a difference between a private nuisance and a public nuisance. Ms. Reynolds stated if someone has garbage in their back yard and she is talking, visible garbage, then the City has a method to go in and clean it up without changing this Code language. They have the right to get a warrant. They have the right to inspect. They have the responsibility under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution to use due process. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 18 of 22 Ms. Reynolds stated there is no law in this country that gives anyone the right to say, I don’t like what I see in her backyard. You are not guaranteed a view. You cannot legislate a view. She knows this because she did research. One case has ever gone to the Supreme Court regarding the view. They were told your view stops at your property line. You do not get to dictate what you look at in my yard. If you are looking in my yard, you are looking at what I have there. Even though they are changing it to say, private outdoor recreation equipment, landscaping materials. No, she can have anything she wants in her backyard. It is not a public nuisance. This is not what they are understanding. The City wants to go clean up a mess. Some of those messes on those pictures they showed were definitely in the front yard, not the backyard. There was a driveway, there were garage doors. That the City already has control of. Ms. Reynolds stated it is a very slippery slope when they start trying to legislate what she can do in her backyard. As a private citizen. As a private property owner. She sent Ms. Kempf an e-mail and said it was nice to see that this Code would include manufactured home parks. The response was, oh, the City does not do code enforcement there, they do their own. That is because it is private property. Same as hers is – private property. The City already has control over rental property and commercial property. The City has control over her front yard which she is not even sure is within the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. Ms. Reynolds stated it is her property. If she is not causing a health or safety hazard, what is in her back yard is her business. Commissioner Oquist stated at the last meeting toward the end, you are in a neighborhood, you are in a community. Yes, she is and if her neighbor had a bath tub in the back yard for three years she would have a long time ago gone and asked over the fence, do you need help? Do you need somebody to help you get rid of that bathtub? Do you need a recommendation of who will take it away? What are your plans for it? Because she is a neighbor. She is not going to call the City and say, come look over my fence, come look out my window, come survey what goes in my neighbor’s yard. Commissioner Oquist stated he disagrees with her completely. He has a right to living in a neighborhood not to have to look at that kind of stuff. All they are trying to do is this kind of an ordinance. She can quote constitutional rights all she wants, but they live in a community. They live in Fridley, and they are trying to keep it so it is decent for everybody else. If he has to look at her stuff in her yard, then he is going to complain if she has a lot of junk in there. They have another neighbor on his street that is unbelievable in the front yard, and nothing is happening. They need to be able to get into there and get that cleaned up. There is a house for sale right across the street from that one, and he does not think they are going to sell it because they have to look at that driveway. Commissioner Oquist stated Ms. Reynolds has to understand she is in a community, she is in a group with other people, and they all want to have it decent. Ms. Reynolds stated the City has no legal right to try and enforce what they want to see out their window. It is not enforceable. You can change the rules. Maybe instead of asking an attorney who does municipal law, maybe they need to talk to someone who does property law or constitutional law. As long as what she has in her back yard and, again she is going to bring up Councilmember Bolkcom’s wheelbarrow, it is not, it is not, a public nuisance to have your wheelbarrow in your back yard. It is not harboring anything. It is not hurting anything. And she was told, well, you can screen it. You can put some whatever around it. Then it would be properly stored. However, Ms. Kempf said good fences do not make good neighbors. They do. They set boundaries. This is my yard. That is your yard. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 19 of 22 Commissioner Oquist stated that is really a bad attitude. Ms. Reynolds replied, it is not. It is what the law is to her. Commissioner Oquist stated he is sorry that is a poor attitude to take. She is not concerned about her neighbor but only about herself. Ms. Reynolds stated she is concerned about herself. She is concerned about her neighbor, and when her neighbor pulled his water heater out of his house and said, well, I gotta put this back here until I figure what to do with it. She said, no, let her call a scrapper. She did not let it happen in the first place; but the fact is if he had put it in his back yard, out of the sight line of the right-of-way, there would have been nothing anyone would do about it. Chairperson Kondrick stated then why would you even bother with the guy if he has a water heater in his back yard. Why is it of concern of hers? Ms. Reynolds replied, because he asked her how to get rid of it. Chairperson Kondrick stated she knows what he is getting at. Ms. Reynolds stated and she is saying had he left it there, it would have been no concern of hers. Chairperson Kondrick stated he is with Commissioner Oquist. He would not want to have that. That is her point of view. Ms. Reynolds stated they are opening a can of worms. She hopes if they do change this that the first time they enforce it they get sued. Chairperson Kondrick replied, they will worry about that. Chairperson Kondrick stated he likes this new idea that staff has come up with. He thinks it makes sense for most people most of the time. It is not going to be 100 percent on anything but most people most of the time, especially those who have common sense. Ms. Kempf stated part of the reason they did not have as many pictures as they would like in the back yard is because there is not a Code. Staff had to kind of use their imagination in the front yard because staff is not able to take pictures in the back yard of course, and they would not do that to neighbors. That is why they had front yard pictures. Commissioner Heintz stated he wanted to thank Ms. Kempf for going back in because this is closer to what he was asking for. It is not for today because, if you are doing the code enforcement, you know what you are looking for; but it is for the current staff replacement or next down the line. If they did not have direction for the ordinance or the Code, they are going to create more problems than what they wanted to see. MOTION by Commissioner Schwankl to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Ostwald. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 20 of 22 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 8:40 P.M. MOTION by CommissionerSchwankl moving Text Amendment, TA #18-02, by the City of Fridley, to allow the code on Exterior Storage to be applied to an entire property and not just what is seen from the public right-of-way to the City Council. Seconded by Commissioner Ostwald. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. RECEIVE MINUTES FROM OTHER COMMISSIONS: 1. Receive the minutes of the June 4, 2018, Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Heintz to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Ostwald. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. Receive the minutes of the August 6, 2018, Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Heintz to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Receive the minutes of the April 10, 2018, Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Hansen to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Heintz. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. Receive the minutes of the July 9, 2018, Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Hansen to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. Receive the minutes of the August 28, 2018, Environmental Quality and Energy Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Hansen to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 21 of 22 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. Receive the minutes of the May 3, 2018, Housing and Redevelopment Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. Receive the minutes of the June 7, 2018, Housing and Redevelopment Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Heintz. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. Receive the minutes of the June 28, 2018, Housing and Redevelopment Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Ostwald to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Schwankl. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS: Ms. Stromberg stated just an update from last month’s Planning Commission meeting, the Watermark Enhanced Care Suites on Fourth Street was approved by the City Council. There was a little discussion about parking and making sure employees are going to be parking on site. Overall the project was approved so they should be seeing that happen shortly. Chairperson Kondrick stated when are they going to start that? Ms. Stromberg replied, there is a four-plex and a single family home that need to be demolished first. She is not sure what the situation is on ownership of those parcels, but she is guessing we’ll see something in the spring. Chairperson Kondrick asked if anybody had any talks with the Bona auto repair place about keeping their cars off the street? Ms. Stromberg replied, they have been doing a good job actually keeping them off of Fourth Street. They do use the frontage road. ADJOURN: MOTION by Commissioner Heintz to adjourn. Seconded by Commissioner Ostwald. Planning Commission Meeting September 19, 2018 Page 22 of 22 UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:48 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Denise M. Johnson Recording Secretary