Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 01-29-2001 . . . CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 29, 2001 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Acting Mayor David Grant called to order the regular City Council meeting at 6:36 p.m. Present: Mayor Dennis Probst (arrived at 7:47 p.m.), Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski (arrived at 7:23 p.m.), David Grant, Gregg Larson, and Lois Rem. Absent: None. Also present were City Administrator, Joe Lynch; Public Works Director, Dwayne Stafford; City Accountant, Terrance Post; Parks and Recreation Director, Thomas Moore; City Engineer, Greg Brown, BRW; City Attorney, Jerome Filla; and Recording Secretary, Kathleen Altman. ADOPT AGENDA Acting Mayor Grant requested items 7(a)(2) and 7(b) be heard after 7(d) when Mayor Probst and Councilmember Aplikowski would be present. MOTION: Councilmember Rem moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to adopt the agenda for the January 29, 2001, regular City Council meeting. The motion carried unanimously (3-0). JIM TOLAAS. RAMSEY COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS. COUTY ROAD I AND HIGHWAY 96/10 INTERCHANGE DISCUSSION Mr. Tolaas presented an update on County Road I and the Highway 96110 Interchange. He indicated, with respect to Highway 96, most of the improvement was completed up to Lexington Avenue with some minor landscaping remaining. Segment 2, Lexington to North Heights Church is scheduled to be let in June of 2002. There is also the issue of acquiring property on the westerly end of the project, which would be acquired at current market value. Some parcels had been identified for possible acquisition, but this would be discussed with staff in the future. He stated he hoped to come back to Council for comment some time in March, 2001 for right-of- way acquisitions to be acquired for Segment 1. The final design would come back to Council at a later time. Councilmember Larson asked if the design of Highway 96 would need to carry throughout the entire project, and if they knew now where the cutouts in the island between Lexington Avenue and Highway 10 would be located. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 2 Mr. Tolaas replied there would be median cuts at the opening of the new City Hall, Hamline Avenue, the Snelling Avenue area, and North Heights Church. He stated the original study identified signals at Y2-mile segments and full openings at 'l4 -mile sections. He stated the design plan would follow the rest of the design along Highway 96. Councilmember Larson stated he understood the lots to be acquired in the mobile home park were owned by the park owner. Mr. Tolaas responded the mobile home owner would first have to be purchased out of their mobile home, and then they would purchase the land from the park owner. Councilmember Larson asked if there was any order established as to the timing of the acquisition of the homes. (i.e., would they contact the mobile home park owners first or the individual mobile home owners) Mr. Tolaas replied there was no set policy for this, but they would probably contact the homeowner first because they would be the most drastically affected by this acquisition. Councilmember Rem asked if there was anything they as Councilmembers could tell the homeowners on the west side of Highway 10. Mr. Tolaas responded they could discuss acquisition, but there was still the issue of funding. Acting Mayor Grant asked how many units would be taken as a result ofthe realignment. Mr. Tolaas replied the maximum would be 17. It would probably be between 13-17 units. He stated those homes could not be relocated because of the age of the units. The homeowner could buy another home within the park, but the home they currently live-in probably could not be relocated. Mr. Lynch asked if the median cut would stay for the City's maintenance facility. Mr. Tolaas responded that the cut would not stay, but although there would not be a full access cut, there would be room to make a U-turn in a safe manner at Hamline Avenue. Mr. Lynch inquired with respect to the intersection of West Round Lake Road would the City be included in the discussion for reimbursement of costs to date. Mr. Tolaas replied he did not have an answer to that, but would be willing to discuss this issue. Councilmember Larson inquired about the lighting and signalization of the intersections. Mr. Tolaas stated the County's lighting policy concerned safety issues, and they would light the intersections, but other lighting would be the responsibility of the City. Councilmember Larson asked if there would be any lighting and signalization at Snelling Avenue and at the new City Hall median cut. Mr. Tolaas replied there would be no lighting or signalization at either location. Councilmember Larson inquired about a possible trail and tunnel crossing somewhere along Highway 96. Mr. Tolaas replied if the City wanted a trail and tunnel crossing, it should be ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 3 addressed as soon as possible because of utility conflicts. He indicated the County was . supportive of trails and tunnels. Councilmember Larson asked if the County would be financially supportive of a trail and tunnel crossing. Mr. Tolaas replied the County had, in the past, contributed small amounts to trails and tunnels and this could be looked at. Mr. Lynch asked ifthe County has in the past given credit against improvements to the City as opposed to a cash disbursement. Mr. Tolaas replied that had been done with Cities in the past and could be something that could be looked into. Mr. Tolaas stated County Road I and the Shutta intersection current volumes did not warrant a signal at this time. He indicated with a realignment of County Road I, they expected traffic volumes might increase somewhat. He indicated they would be releasing their Project Development Report in the near future. Mr. Lynch inquired about acquisition costs to the City for the properties for the County Road I project. Mr. Tolaas replied he assumed there would be acquisition costs, except in the instance of a realignment issue. However, for widening issues, the City would bear the cost. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES . a. b. January 2,2001 Organizational Council Meeting January 8, 2001 Regular Council Meeting January 16,2001 Council Worksession c. Councilmember Larson requested the following corrections: January 16,2001, Worksession, Page 2, 11th Paragraph, 2nd sentence, "Councilmembers Larson and Rem had no preference, other than that Councilmember Larson was glad we were not using TeamWorks only because it would be nice to have a change." January 16,2001, Worksession, Page 2, last Paragraph, last sentence to Page 3, 15t Paragraph, "Councilmember Larson commented on the review format, and stated that the questions were difficult to determine his day-to-day operations of the City." January 8, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes, Page 5, last paragraph, remove "if' in front of Mr. Whittles. January 8, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes, Page 8, last paragraph, second to the last sentence, "He did not agree that enclosing each dumpster could be a solution". Councilmember Rem requested the following corrections: . January 2, 2001, Special Council meeting Minutes, Page 1, she pointed out the Minutes did not indicate who requested the changes to the December 11, 2000 Regular Council Meeting Minutes. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 4 January 8, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes, Page 3, 2nd paragraph, ".. . 50th Anniversary ofthe . City as a good time to incorporate the new logo." January 8, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes, Page 3, Planning Case #00-37, first sentence, "Ms. Chaput explained applicant was requesting a front yard setback variance..." January 8, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes, Page 8, 4th paragraph, last sentence, "She indicated they used to have a 40-yard compactor before they moved into this facility, and stated she did not think. . . " January 8, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes, Page 10, 4th paragraph, first sentence, "Mr. Aiken stated the phasing reflects the two main goals of the website, the first being. . . " January 8, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes, Page 10, 4th paragraph, 2nd sentence, change qualitative to Quality. January 8, 2001, Page 15, 6th paragraph, last sentence, "Councilmember Larson concurred. He stated if staff was not enthusiastic about this, he could not think of any reason to renew at this time." January 8,2001, Page 15, Motion for Metro East Development Partnership, removed to deny. . MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve the meeting minutes of January 2,2001 Organizational Council Meeting; January 8, 2001 Regular Council Meeting; January 16,2001 Council Worksession as corrected. The motion carried unanimously (3-0). CONSENT CALENDAR A. Claims and Payroll B. Authorization to Schedule Special City Council Meeting on February 5, 2001 for the Purpose of Conducting Regular Business of the City Council C. Authorization to Relocate the Regular City Council Meeting Scheduled for February 12, 2001 (To Initiate the City's Fiftieth Anniversary Celebration and Ceremony) MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar and authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. The motion carried unanimously (3-0). PUBLIC COMMENTS . Acting Mayor Grant invited those present to come forward and address the Council on any items not already on the agenda. No public comments were made. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 5 UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. Planning Cases 1. Case #00-34, Metro Community Credit Union, 3533 North Lexington Avenue, Sign Variance Mr. Lynch explained Metro Community Credit Union was requesting approval of a sign variance for an additional wall sign at 3533 N. Lexington Avenue. He stated in June, 2000, Metro Community Credit Union made application for two permanent wall signs at their new location within Arden Plaza, located at 3533 N. Lexington Avenue. The sign permit application was approved for only one permanent wall sign, as stated in the Sign Ordinance. For each exterior entrance per business within a strip mall, one permanent wall sign was allowed, by Ordinance. The applicant was told that a variance application was required for the additional wall sign. The previous tenant at this location had two wall signs. The building juts out in this area, creating two different faces to the building and the need for two wall signs, facing in both directions. The applicant was requesting that an additional sign be permitted as it was for the previous tenant on the other face of the building, even though there was only one exterior entrance for this tenant. Staff could not find a record of a sign permit for the previous tenant or any variances granted in the past at this location. Mr. Lynch explained in order to grant a variance, findings of fact must be identified to prove that an undue hardship existed. According to the criteria, staff made the following findings: 1. Hardship - A hardship was defined by the physical characteristics of the land that created a need for a variance from the Ordinance. A hardship could not be based on economics. The circumstances of this tenant were not unique and the property could still be put to a reasonable use without the granting of a variance for an additional wall sign. Also, granting a variance was not in keeping with the intent of the Ordinance to, ".. . encourage effective and orderly communication by reducing clutter. . ." and "... for an attractive and orderly environment by reducing visual clutter. . . ". It could be determined that no undue hardship existed, creating the need for the variance. 2. Materially Detrimental - The granting of the variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or zone. However, if permitted, other businesses within the mall with only one exterior entrance would also have the right to apply for a variance, adding to the number of wall signs on the overall building, not meeting the intent of the Sign Ordinance. 3. Special District Regulations - The Metro Community Credit Union was located within the B-2 Zoning District. The regulations of this section did not apply to this district. Mr. Lynch stated the staff recommended denial of Planning Case #00-34, variance for a second wall sign for Metro Community Credit Union, located at 3533 N. Lexington Avenue, for the following reasons: . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 6 1. Undue hardship did not exist because the applicant did not meet the spirit and intent of the Ordinance; 2. The circumstances of the request were not unique to the property; and 3. The property could still be put to a reasonable use without the granting of a variance. Mr. Lynch stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Case #00-34, variance for a second wall sign for Metro Community Credit Union, located at 3533 N. Lexington Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. The hardship was attributable to the physical surroundings of built structures and topography that block views of this portion of the building; 2. The design of this portion of the building required two signs for visibility from either entrance onto the property; 3. The proposed sign aesthetically matched the surrounding tenants and did not negatively impact the area. Councilmember Aplikowski arrived at 7:23 p.m. Councilmember Larson stated he had difficulty determining what the hardship was in this instance, Councilmember Rem stated it appeared clear to her that the signs would face two separate street entrances to the property. She stated this was a unique feature to this property, and without the sign a person looking for this business would have difficulty locating it. Sherry Kangas, 3533 North Lexington, Metro Credit Union, stated the problem was that the sign could not be seen from County Road E. A person had to get into the parking lot and then look back to see the sign. Councilmember Grant stated it was impossible to tell what business occupied that comer because of the uniqueness of the building. He agreed with the Planning Commission. Councilmember Larson indicated he still had a concern regarding the signage issue. Mr. Lynch indicated with respect to the staffs perspective it was confusing that there was continuing differences of opinion. He stated staff should probably be directed to change the Ordinance rather than trying to fit each instance into the Ordinance. Councilmember Rem indicated the Planning Commission was aware of this item and did plan to address the Sign Ordinance this year. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 7 MOTION: Counci1member Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve Planning Case #00-34, variance for a second wall sign for Metro Community Credit Union, located at 3533 N. Lexington Avenue. The motion carried (3-1). (Larson) . 3. Case #00-41, City of Arden Hills, Neighborhood Business District Language Amendment, Formal Ordinance #324 Mr. Lynch explained the City requested that Section 5 (E) and (H) #3 Zoning Ordinance #291 be amended to allow dwelling units in conjunction with a business in the Neighborhood Business District, with certain restrictions. On September 27, 1999, the language for a new zoning district, the neighborhood business district, was adopted by the City Council and inserted into the City's Zoning Ordinance. While reviewing the proposed rezoning for seven groups of properties for this district at the November 1, 2000 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission recognized that the neighborhood business district language did not permit any types of dwelling units. At this time, the Planning Commission directed staff to propose an Ordinance amendment addressing this issue. . Mr. Lynch stated the Zoning Ordinance listed a number of different dwelling types that were permitted in various districts of the City. Typically, multiple family or two-family dwelling units were more appropriate dwelling types to mix with a business in a district such as this. Since this was a business district, some restrictions should be placed on permitting dwelling units as a sole use on a property. Currently, the neighborhood business district did not permit any type of dwelling units. Staff proposed that "Multiple Family" and "Two-Family" dwellings be allowed in the neighborhood business district through a special use permit. By making this a special use in the district, an additional restriction could be placed on it to ensure that dwelling units could not be the sole use of the property, as proposed in Section 5 (H) #3. By adding in certain dwelling units as permitted uses in this district, other language section 5 (H) needed to be addressed. This was specific to where the text referenced certain requirements when "adjacent to residential uses". This could have negative implications to a development if the language was not amended to ensure that the residential reference applied to uses outside of the NB District. Mr. Lynch explained the Planning Commission directed staff to define the use "Mixed Residential Types", as shown in the Land Use Chart. Staff did not locate this term anywhere else within the Zoning Ordinance and was unable to find a definition to match it from Ordinances of surrounding communities. The Planning Commission recommended this term be stricken from the Zoning Ordinance instead of proposing a definition that may indirectly include or prohibit certain uses. Also, there was some uncertainty in what this term should mean, creating a great deal of difficulty in developing a definition. . Mr. Lynch stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of Planning Case #00-31, amending Section 5 of the Zoning Ordinance #291 as presented in the "Proposed Amendments to Section 5 of the Zoning Ordinance" section, adopting formal Ordinance #324. He indicated pursuant to Section VIII, D, 1, b of the Zoning Ordinance a ". ..four-fifths (4/5's) majority ofthe full Council was required for action to amend the Zoning Ordinance. In the event an application . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 8 for amendment was approved, an appropriate amending Ordinance shall be executed and published. " Councilmember Rem stated she believed this was a good change to the Ordinance. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve Planning Case #00-41, City of Arden Hills, Neighborhood Business District Language Amendment, Formal Ordinance #324. The motion carried (4-0). C. Res. #01-06, Resolution Approving an Application for Authorization to Conduct One-Day Off-site Gambling Mr. Post explained Minnesota Statues allowed a licensed charitable gambling organization to conduct a one-day, off-site gambling with the consent ofthe establishment and the approval by Resolution of the City in which the proposed event was located. He stated the Circle Pines/Lexington Lions Club was requesting approval to conduct a one-day raffle event at the Arden Hills Holiday Inn on March 31, 2001. This organization had been approved to conduct similar events at this location for the past three (3) years. The applicant was aware of the City's fifty percent (50%) trade area spending requirement, and had indicated its willingness to comply with this City Ordinance. He stated staff recommended that the Council approve applicant's request. Jan Kreminski, Circle Pines-Lexington Lion, stated this was a one-day event along with a raffle and the Circle Pines-Lexington Lions had done this event in the City in the past. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve Resolution No. 01-06 entitled, "A Resolution Approving an Application to Conduct One-Day, Off-Site Gambling" for the Circle Pines/Lexington Lions Club March 31, 2001 event at the Arden Hills Holiday Inn. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). D. Pay Estimate #2, Water Main Improvement Project, Old Highway 10/Arden Manor Park Improvements Mr. Brown explained the City awarded David Perkins Contracting, Inc. of Ramsey, Minnesota the Old Highway 10 Water Main Improvements, and Arden Manor Park Improvements project on September 11, 2000 for a total contract amount of $227,828.00. Payment # 1 was approved on November 13,2000 for the amount of$87,110.25. He stated on the Old Highway 10 water main improvements, the Contractor had installed all of the water main, hydrants and services and the 36-inch culvert extension. Driveway restoration, clean up and sodding would be completed this spring. With respect to the Arden Manor Park Improvements the Contractor had begun installing the fence around the basketball courts and had planted all of the trees according to plan. The remaining fence work, driveway paving and sodding would be complete this spring. Work for ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 9 both the water main improvements and Arden Manor Park would be completed no later than . May 5, 2000. Mr. Brown recommended the Council approve Pay Estimate #2 for Dave Perkins Contracting, Inc. of Ramsey, Minnesota in the amount of$44,257.67. A retainage of five percent (5%) was being held of this project. . . Acting Mayor Grant asked about the planting of the trees. He understood the trees would be planted in the spring. Mr. Brown responded the trees were planted October, 2000. They were planted at a time of the year when they could still be established, and the trees were guaranteed one to two years. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve Pay Estimate #2 for Dave Perkins Contracting, Inc. of Ramsey, Minnesota in the amount of $44,257.67. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). Mayor Probst arrived at 7:47 p.m. and presided over the remainder of the meeting. 2. Case #00-41, Chesapeake, 1-35W and 1-694, Preliminary Plat/Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD) Mr. Post explained applicant was requesting the replatting of the existing Morris Communications property from one parcel into three, accommodating the existing billboards as their own separate lots (Outlots A and B) and for comments on a concept planned unit development for development ofthe properties southwest of Gateway Boulevard. Mr. Post stated Chesapeake Companies had been working on assembling the parcels at the comer of 1- 35W and 1-694 for over a year. In the future, they intended to combine and replat the parcels currently owned by Morris Communications, A TS Steel and MT Properties into one developable parcel. Morris Communications was a willing seller to Chesapeake Companies on the condition that the land beneath their two existing billboards be platted as unique parcels, which was why this application was being made at this time. Chesapeake's conversations with Morris Communications had found that creating separate parcels for the billboards was a nonnegotiable item. If the City wished to fully develop this key piece of property on the comer ofI-35W and 1- 694, there should be careful consideration made to this request. Mr. Post explained approval of the preliminary plat of three lots might be granted if minimum design standards were met. He stated special requirements for the Gateway Business District were outlined in Section 5 (M) of the Zoning Ordinance, which included: 1. Allowable Use - In the Gateway Business District, "office" was a permitted use. There was a stipulation by this Section that stated that office uses could not occupy less than 25% or more than 50% of a project's total floor area. Both Concept Plans were proposing 100% office. However, the purpose of the language was to accommodate a maximum percentage of office for traffic reasons. The Welsh Developments along Gateway Boulevard were limited in their office component to 20% (warehouse of the remaining area) so that more office use could be accommodated on this property when future development occurred. If 100% office was ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29 2001 , 10 permitted on this site, this had major implications for the development of the remaining parcels . in the District, allowing for mainly warehouse development. 2. Business Standards: Building Height - Concept A was the most intense proposal of the two. It proposed two five- story office buildings, joined by a two-story entrance atrium in the center. The total office development was 450,000 square feet. The project creates an important presence at the freeway intersection. Concept B proposed one central five-story office building and a separate one-story office building on either side. The total office development was 315,000 square feet. This singular building would have less of an architectural presence than Concept A although still visible at the intersection. Building Setbacks - Concept A, it appeared this concept met the minimum building setback requirements. Concept B, it appeared this concept met the minimum building setback requirements. . Building Exterior and Views - Concept A, the building faced the intersection with a small row of parking separating the two. The north side of the building faced two parking decks across a landscaped area. The view from Gateway Boulevard included two single level parking decks, upper levels of both office wings and the atrium. Concept B, the five-story building faced the southwest with a small parking area between it and the Interstate. The smaller buildings were angled away from the Interstate to minimize intrusion to the existing wetlands and avoid the power transmission lines. The middle building faced to a level parking deck, connecting to the building from the upper level. The smaller building faced the parking deck across small parking areas. Traffic, Site Access and Parking - Concept A provided for two parking decks, or 716 spaces, surface parking provided 1330 spaces and 150 spaces were provided under the office building. This was a total of2196 spaces, 59 spaces more than the 2138 spaces that were required. The minimum setback requirements from surface parking were not met in this proposal. The parking setbacks varied between 10 and 40 feet in width along the freeway and between 20 and 75 feet from the paved portion of Gateway Boulevard. There were three accesses off of Gateway Boulevard onto this property. Concept B, the parking deck provided 414 spaces, 1,100 spaces in the surface parking and 60 spaces under the office building for a total of 1,574 spaces. One space was provided for every 200 square feet. Parking setbacks vary between 10 and 40 feet along the Interstates and 20 to 65 feet along Gateway Boulevard. There were four accesses shown from Gateway Boulevard to this property. . Drainage, Wetlands and Floodplain - Concept A, had some unavoidable wetland encroachment with this proposal, requiring mitigation, but the major portion ofthe existing wetland system remained intact. Wetland mitigation and storm water ponding requirements were provided adjacent to the western wetland system. A total of 46,305 square feet of wetlands located in the central part of the site needed to be filled to develop this concept. This required mitigation at a ratio of2:1 or 71,730 square feet of new wetland and 35,289 square feet of storm water treatment pond in the northwestern corner of the site. Concept B, the same conditions ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 11 . existed as Concept A; however, a total of 46,551 square feet of wetlands located in the central part of the site were required for this Concept. Mitigation required the creation of 70,496 square feet of new wetland and 36,852 square feet of storm water treatment pond. Mr. Post explained the Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat of the existing Morris owned property into three properties, including two outlots; designated A and B, in Planning Case #00-46, subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed outlots, A and B, did not meet the minimum requirements for a developable lot and would not be developed in the future, as platted; 2. All proposed easements, newly created or vacated as per the submitted plan, must be properly filed and recorded with Ramsey County and proof of this action provided to the City; and 3. Application must be made for a final plat no later than three months after action was taken on this application by the City Councilor the preliminary plat became void. The Planning Commission also offered the following comments on the Concept PUD: 2. . 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. . 1. Concept A appeared to meet the intent of the Gateway Business District more than Concept B by offering a greater architectural presence, taking full advantage of the site's location. The conflicting text regarding the maximum height requirement and percentage of office within the District should be discussed and clarified by the City to encourage the goals as established by the Gateway Business District language; Exterior building finishes should utilize brick, stone, glass or some combination of these materials, compatible with what exists within the District; The proposed western entrances to the site should be relocated to eliminate two 90 degree corners; Entrances to the property should be considered opposite to those that exist on the north side of Gateway Boulevard; Reconstruction of the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and Round Lake Road should be considered to accommodate development; Consideration should be given to budgeting for Round Lake Road improvements by the City; Consideration and discussion of the use and acquisition of the railway bridge in conjunction with this development, the City of New Brighton and the County needed to occur; Development of the site should include a pedestrian trail along the south side of Gateway Boulevard and/or within the site; Further consideration to setbacks from the surface parking areas should be made since neither proposal met the minimum requirements; Existing wetlands and ponds should be interconnected with proposed ponds and wetlands for maximum circulation of runoff and positive flood control; Final outlet of the wetland system should use the City's storm water pond on the western portion of the site; 9. 10. 11. 12. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 12 13. Movement ofthe City's storm water pond to the east, as proposed, was not recommended; and Wetland mitigation should consider the existing trunk sanitary sewer since the City would not relocate this when other options might exist. 14. Mr. Post stated he had received a reply from Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban today commenting on the Planning Commission's recommendations. Peter Carlson, Chesapeake Companies, introduced John Shardlow of Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban. Mr. Carlson and Mr. Shardlow presented the proposed site alternatives and general overview regarding the development. Councilmember Larson stated if there was a window of time this needed to be completed by because the City, having to exercise eminent domain, may not fit into that window. Mr. Carlson responded he understood that and they would work with the City regarding this issue. Councilmember Grant asked if they had any idea which concept they would be using. Mr. Carlson stated they did not have any indication at this time. The idea was to make the most use of the site as possible. Mr. Filla stated the City was contractually obligated to leave the two billboards there. He asked what would happen to the two outlots if the billboards would not be there in the future. He requested language be inserted stating the outlots were non-conforming City lots, and if the billboards would be removed in the future, language be added as to how the land would be used at that time. Councilmember Larson indicated Concept A was more favorable than Concept B. He was concerned about the parking area surrounding buildings and asked if this could be looked at to determine if there was another alternative. Steve Dowdy, Pope & Associates, responded what was being presented was a feasibility study. He stated they tried to limit the surface parking by adding a parking deck, but parking needs were a great concern of tenants. He stated the parking in the front of the building could not be underground parking because of the water table. Councilmember Aplikowski asked how much higher than 35 feet the proposal for the five-story building would be. Mr. Dowdy replied it would be approximately 75 feet tall. Each floor level would be approximately 14 feet high. Councilmember Aplikowski stated she did not have any concerns with the height, but wanted to make sure they also followed the Ordinance as much as possible and not keep requesting variances. She asked Council look at the height Ordinance in the future. She stated she had a concern that the complex appeared to be a strictly office showroom building and was not sure that fit into what they originally envisioned this development would be. . . . I ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 13 Councilmember Rem stated she agreed with the plan, but had concerns about traffic and signage issues. Mr. Carlson replied this would be something they would need to be aware of when the final plan was prepared. He stated with respect to traffic, their study indicated they were within the parameters with respect to that issue. Mayor Probst indicated he was in favor of approving this preliminary plan. Mr. Filla requested item 1 be rewritten as follows: 1. Restrictive covenant or other recordable document recognize that proposed outlots A and B do not meet minimum requirements for the Gateway Business Zone and cannot be developed for a non-billboard use in the future, as platted; MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to approve Planning Case #00-46, Chesapeake, 1-35W and 1-694 Preliminary Plat/Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD), taking into consideration the rewording of item 1 under the conditions by Mr. Filla. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). B. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), 1-35W Noise Wall Discussion Mr. Post explained this subject was discussed at the January 16,2001 Council Worksession. Subsequent discussion reflected that Councilmembers had additional questions concerning more detailed drawings, wall location, proximity to existing MnDOT fence and mobile homes, design options available to the City and on what cost basis and finally a process question regarding how the proposed project had been communicated. Gayle Gedstad, MnDOT, stated that the park owners were supportive of this wall. Mayor Probst expressed concern about the homeowners not being aware the walls were going to be put up. Mr. Gedstad stated the homes would not be that close to the wall, but that sunlight might be blocked in the summer. Councilmember Larson asked if they would put fill in on the residential side of the fence. Mr. Getstad responded no fill would be necessary. The fence would match the grade with the bottom elevation of the wall. Mayor Probst asked when the Council needed to make a decision regarding this. Mr. Lynch responded they would like a decision by March 1,2001. Mayor Probst suggested Mr. Husnik and/or his partner conduct a meeting with the residents to inform them of this proposal. He requested a staff member be present for this meeting. Councilmember Aplikowski disagreed that a meeting was necessary. She suggested a letter be sent to the residents explaining what was happening. Mayor Probst responded he did not have any preference as to how the residents receive this information, just that they were made aware of what was happening. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 14 Councilmember Grant asked what the life expectancy and maintenance cost of the fence was. Mr. Getstad replied he did not know the answers to this question, but reminded the City Council that maintenance would be the financial responsibility of MnDOT. Councilmember Larson stated he preferred fence E-l or E-2. He indicated he did not like the look of the concrete fence. With respect to the City Logo, it would depend on what the fence looked like. He stated any landscaping that would be added would be a definite advantage. Councilmember Aplikowski stated she preferred fence E-2 in the darker color. Councilmember Grant asked if the State had done a study in terms of overall cost of each of these. Mr. Getstad responded he did not know the answer to that, but would see if he could obtain this information. Councilmember Grant stated his preference was either fence E-l or E-2. Councilmember Larson left the meeting at 9: 18 p.m. and returned at 9:20 p.m. The Council agreed on fence E-2, in probably the dark stain, and requested staffto inform the park owner to communicate to the residents the wall would be put up. E. City Hall Construction - Change Order #2; Pay Request #4; Professional Design Service Fee, Architectural Alliance. 1. Change Order #2 Mr. Lynch explained Change Order #2 was for a traffic loop detector that was in conflict with the installation of the water main. The Contractor was able to move the loop detector wire out of the way by hand and had no adverse effects on the project. Ramsey County workers would replace the wire that was moved out of the way. The total for this work was $112.00. Mayor Probst suggested authorizing the City Administrator authority to pay amounts up to $5,000.00 in total, so Change Orders did not need to be decided by the Council at every meeting. Councilmember Grant suggested authorizing the City Administrator authority to pay amounts up to $1,000.00. Councilmember Rem asked ifthis would be a cumulative total of $5,000.00 in Change Orders, or $5,000.00 per Change Order. Mayor Probst replied he intended it would be a cumulative total. Councilmember Grant indicated he had misunderstood Mayor Probst's suggestion. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve Change Order #2 in the amount of$112.00, and authorizing the City Administrator authority to approve up to $5,000.00 in Change Orders with . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 15 keeping Council informed as to the cumulative amount. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 2. Pay Request #4 Mr. Lynch explained Rochon Corporation had submitted their Pay Request #4 in the amount of $195,892.45. The pay request covered the period ending December 30, 2000. Architectural Alliance had visited the site and found the percentages for work completed were accurate. The percentage of the contract amount applied for was 19.7% (minus a 5% retainage of $28,996.99). Staff recommended approval ofthe payment of$195,892.45 to Rochon Corporation. MOTION: Councilmember Larson moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve Rochon Corporation's Payment Request #4 in the amount of $195,892.45. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). 3, Professional Design Services Fee, Architectural Alliance Mr. Lynch explained Architectural Alliance was requesting additional fee for professional design services. Architectural Alliance's basic service fee of $162,500.00 was established in 1998 at 8.6% of an estimated construction budget of$I,887,750.00. The City had decided to proceed with a $2,942,000.00 construction project. Architectural Alliance was requesting an adjustment of their fee in the amount of $22,280.00 based on the accepted construction budget less the cost for the extension of the utilities and the $65,000.00 budget allocated for the basement. Mayor Probst expressed concern this was not a sliding scale and the 8.6% was a fixed rate. Councilmember Larson expressed concern that this would keep occurring, and Architectural Alliance should have known what their cost structure was prior to the development. Councilmember Grant agreed. Mayor Probst stated the City did change the scope of the project and believed this particular charge was fair. Councilmember Larson asked why did they not draw the line at this time, instead of the next time Architectural Alliance asked for a fee adjustment. Mayor Probst responded they would be entitled to payment on number 1. Councilmember Larson agreed, but expressed concern with paying them for number 2. Councilmember Rem requested a copy of the Contract that was signed by the City. Councilmember Larson agreed. Mayor Probst suggested deferring item number 3. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 16 Councilmember Grant requested staff to pay special attention to Contracts and delineate if they . are based on a percentage, or based on a fixed fee. ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS A. Valentine Hills Elementary School, PT A Request for Cooperative Financing of Playground Equipment. Mr. Lynch stated this was a request for some modification ofthe existing playground equipment. The petition did not state all of the information. The Parks, Trails and Recreation Committee did not support the project. Councilmember Grant believed this was to expand the playground equipment. He indicated the playground was used by the neighborhood and surrounding areas, as well as the school. Councilmember Larson indicated Parks and Recreation had decided unanimously not to expand the equipment because it was wrong for the City to be paying for improvements made to a School District facility. Councilmember Aplikowski asked if they financed some of the equipment, was the City liable for injuries. . Councilmember Rem asked what arrangements the City had with the school for the use of the facility. Mr. Moore replied that the gymnasium facilities were used, for which the City paid a fee. Councilmember Larson stated the playground equipment they current had was a nice facility and he did not believe the City should be spending money on this. Councilmembers Aplikowski and Rem asked that a formal presentation be made to the Council. Councilmember Grant stated all of this would be looked at during the 10-year comprehensive plan and suggested this be tabled until the plan was prepared. Councilmember Larson agreed. Councilmember Aplikowski suggested Valentine Hills Elementary School PT A put in a request to a charitable gambling association for assistance. COUNCIL COMMENTS: . Mayor Probst stated he had spoken with Michael Fix, Commanders' Representative at the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP), was advised that the Quit Claim Deed to the new City Hall would be delivered within the next 24 to 48 hours. He asked the Council if they wanted a formal ceremony on February 12,2001 for the handing over ofthe Deed. He asked staffto inform Mr. Fix about the ceremony. Mr. Post stated the City website was up and running. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29, 2001 17 Councilmember Grant stated the Finance and Operations Committee met in January and the main item to be worked on in 2001 was for additional members on the Committee. Councilmember Larson stated the Parks & Trails Committee met and spent most of the time discussing plans for the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Larson stated a discussion had taken place at the Fire Board Meeting regarding the Lake Johanna Volunteer Firemen's Benefit Association, Inc. He stated the City was paying a portion of the contributions that went into the benefit fund, in addition to other sources of contributions. This year they came to the Fire Board to increase the amount that came out of the Alliant Tech money. They requested an amount of $10,000.00 be put in both this year and next year. He asked for direction as to what the City wanted from the Fire Department. He stated the Fire Department had indicated it was becoming more and more difficult to retain qualified firemen, so if the benefits were attractive it would bring in more qualified firemen. Mr. Post indicated that State Fire Relief Aid was also contributed to the fund as an additional revenue source. Mayor Probst indicated the Alliant TechSystems money had always been a source of contention with the City and expressed concern the City had no right to Station 1 or the equipment that was in there. He stated he did not see where the City was benefiting from this. He stated he did not support this request. Councilmember Aplikowski stated she did not have a feeling one way or the other regarding this. Councilmember Rem stated she also did not have a feeling regarding this. Councilmember Larson stated the website looked very nice. Councilmember Larson asked why they had not talked about putting the new City Logo on the two City water towers. Mr. Stafford replied he would inquire what the cost to do this would be. Councilmember Aplikowski stated Dave Sand had been elected Chair of the Cable Commission and expressed concern with the Planning Commission selections. Mayor Probst stated he had also received comments regarding the Planning Commission selections. Councilmember Rem stated the Newsletters Committee was meeting on Wednesday. She also reported the Northwest Youth and Family Services was having their retreat this Friday and Saturday. Mayor Probst presented a summary of the Ramsey County/MnDOT - TCAAP discussions. He indicated there was a meeting scheduled for February 15,2001. It appeared they would be proceeding without MnDOT at this time. He stated the public works site might be moved off Highway 96 frontage. Mayor Probst asked to see the questionnaire that was prepared for the parks comprehensive plan. Mayor Probst stated the website looked very nice. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - JANUARY 29,2001 18 Mayor Probst stated announced the an event sponsored by Mayor Coleman at the Winter Carnival being held this Saturday if any Councilmember were interested in attending. ADJOURN MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Larson seconded a motion to adjo the meeting at 10:52 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). NOTICE OF MEETINGS There will be a Special Council Meeting held Monday, February 5, 2001 at 7:30 p.m. at the Arden Hills Council chambers.