Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 08-14-2000 . . . r CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 14,2000 7:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Acting Mayor Gregg Larson called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7:30 p,m, Present: Councilmembers Beverly Aplikowski, David Grant, Gregg Larson, and Lois Rem, Absent: Mayor Dennis Probst. Also present were City Administrator, Joe Lynch; Public Works Director, Dwayne Stafford; City Engineer, Greg Brown, BRW; City Planner, Jennifer Chaput; and Recording Secretary, Mary Mullen. ADOPT AGENDA MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to adopt the agenda for the August 12, 2000, regular City Council meeting, with the following change: Under Item 7, Unfinished and New Business, insert Item 7B, 2000 Sealcoating Project, before Item 7 A, Planning Cases. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). APPROVAL OF MINUTES A, July 31, 2000 Regular Council Meeting Councilmember Grant requested the following change: On page 4, 3rd paragraph, 3rd line, replace "whenever they wish" with "on whatever day they prefer", Councilmember Rem requested the following changes: On page 1, under Roll Call, note that City Attorney Jerry Filla was present. On page 16, Under Item E, Website Development Task Force, 2nd paragraph, 2nd line, replace "complete" with "available". On page 21, 6th paragraph, 2nd and 3rd lines, replace "the Mayor, Mr. Kelliher. . ." with "Mr. Kelliher, the Mayor. . .". MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve the meeting minutes of the July 31,2000 Regular Council Meeting, as amended. The motion carried unanimously (4-0), . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14,2000 2 CONSENT CALENDAR A. B. C. Claims and Payroll Appoint Election Judges for Primary Election 2000 Business License Renewals MOTION: Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Aplikowski scconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar and authorize execution of all necessary documents contained tberein. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). PUBLIC COMMENTS Acting Mayor Larson invited those present to come forward and address the Council on any items not already on thc agenda. There were no public comments. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. 2000 Sealcoating Project, Allied Blacktop Mr, Brown explained that two actions were required by the Council with regard to the 2000 Sealcoating Proj ect. He stated that Change Order # I pertains to additional work requested by the Council at Trinity Lutheran Church parking lot and the Lake Johanna Fire Department parking lot. He added this change increases the contract amount by $8,323.64. Mr. Brown stated that Payment Request #1 is for final payment on the contract in the amount of $48,886.14. He added that there was no retainage as work was done in conjunction with City staff. Councilmember Grant asked whether City staff were pleased with the work that was done. Mr. Stafford confirmed that the project turncd out well, adding that the contractor changed the schedule to accommodate National Night Out as well as a delay in the removal of a boat trailer parked in the street. He added that response from residents has been positive, Acting Mayor Larson stated that tllis project was discussed brielly at the Planning Commission's last meeting, where positive feedback was expressed by Commission members who thought the new material used was superior to that which was used in previous years. Councilmember Rem stated that several residents had cxpressed their appreciation of the way the project was handled and the end result. MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to approve Change Order #1 and Pay Estimate #1 (Final Payment) for Allied Blacktop Co., Maple Grove, Minnesota, in the amount of$48,886.14. The motion carried unanimously (4-0), . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14, 2000 3 B. Planning Cases 1. Case #00-11, City of Arden Hills, Ordinance Amendment Ms, Chaput explained that in response to resident complaints, staff has identified some portions of the Zoning Ordinance that require revision in order to properly address complaints. The revisions arc a result of researching other cities' ordinances as well as staff and Planning Commission discussions, Ms. Chaput stated that the recommendations of the Planning Commission canle before the City Council on July 31, 2000. At that time, the City Council tabled discussion of the amendments. Since that time, the City's planning consultant had been consultcd on the definition of "family" as it is used in other cities and some additional recommendations were made. Ms, Chaput reviewed amendments to Section II (D), Definitions, with regard to Item I, pertaining to single family homes that are being used as student housing, Ms, Chaput also stated that Councilmembers bave been presented with a handout, outlining the definitions used for "family" by the Universal Building Code, the City of Roseville and the City of Shoreview, all of which are similar to what is being proposed, The City has had a number of complaints on single family homes that have been converted into housing for numerous students attending the local colleges. The current code does not have any language in it to deter this type of activity, essentially allowing multifamily dwellings in single- family zoning districts. Following discussions with the City's planning consultant, it was also recommended that the definition of "household" be amcnded since it did not match the other definition amendments being proposed. Some additional language has also been added to the definition of "family" in order to address state law regarding group homes, as recommended by the City's plalllling consultant. Councilmember Aplikowski askcd how the amendment would affect the status of group homes. Ms, Chaput stated that there is a definition for a group facility in a residential setting, adding that this falls under State law and as such would be subject to State regulations. Shannon Johnson, 1902 Noble Road, stated shc livcs next to a home which is rented to students, She added there are currently eleven students living in the home which, in her opinion, is excessive, She expressed concern that the garbage at the home might attract dogs and raccoons, Ms. Johnson stated that every student has a vehicle, and there are nine to twclve cars parked in tbe driveway every morning, Shc added that when the students have friends over, there are cars parked up and down the street. She expressed frustration over the number of vehicles in the driveway, She noted that the students are friendly and quiet. Ms, Johnson stated that parking is the main issue, adding that if the City limits the number of people living in a borne, that would solve the problem. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14, 2000 4 Ferdinand Peters, 1708 Portland Avenue, St. Paul, stated he is an attorney representing Jerry and Julie Warner, the owners of the home on Noble Road which is currently rented to students, He added that his clients fecl the ordinance amendments have been generated because of the Warner's property although it has Citywide implications. He notcd that if the amendments are adopted, it will sevcrely restrict his client's use ofthcir property. Mr. Peters stated that the issues raised by Ms, Johnson should be brought directly to the Warncr's as the owners of the property to give them an opportunity to address the problems. He added that the phrase "on a regular basis" in the section pertaining to driveways is vague, Mr. Peters stated that his clients have applied for all the necessary permits with regard to the changes made to their property, and have attempted to accommodate parking. I-Ie added that he has checked with the sheriff who confirmed that no report has ever been made against the property, Mr. Peters stated that other communities allow five umelated pcoplc in a dwclling. He expressed his client's opposition to any definition that limits the use of their property, He added that students should be integrated into the community, Leon Godeke, 1895 Noble Road, stated he lives across trom the home being discussed, adding that the homeowner lives in Pinc City. He expressed doubt that the Warner's would be willing to drivc to the home if telephoned, He added that thirteen cars were parked in the driveway until midnight one night, and one car used his driveway to turn around, He stated that all the residents on the street might decide to rent their homes out, which would greatly affect the neighborhood, Dick Wenzel, 1931 Noble Road, stated he has nevcr had a problem with the home, although he does not live next door. He added, in his opinion, that City ordinances in general are not enforced. Acting Mayor Larson stated that City staff deal with ordinance violations on a complaint basis. Councilmember Rem stated that tlle Noble Road neighborhood had mobilized effectively in opposition to this particular home being used as a rental property, adding that it is not the only neighborhood in the City with such a complaint. She noted that there had been some discussion among City staff with regard to efforts to ensure that neighborhoods are made aware of such ordinances. Councilmember Rem stated that the ordinance amendmcnts are intended to put a reasonable limit on residential properties to make them tolerable to other residents. Jerry Warner, owner of 1898 Noble Road, stated both his daughters live at the property and are available if the neighbors have complaints. He added he understands that parking is a problem, and he has provided sufficient parking. He noted that he is unable to regulate the street parking of the students' friends, . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14, 2000 5 Joelle Warner, 1898 Noble Road, stated her father owns the home and she lives there with her sister and several renters, She added that the neighbors on the street know her and her sister, and are welcome to bring complaints to them, Councilmember Grant stated that the definitions of single-family, two-family, and multiple- family dwellings are unclear and should be more clearly defined. Councilmember Aplikowski asked for clarification with regard to the number of entrances to the home at 1898 Noble Road. Mr. Warner stated the home is a split entry with one main entrance, and a locked door leading to the lower unit. Mr, Godekc stated it is a regular split entry homc. Councilmember Aplikowski expressed concern with regard to the definition of "family". She stated shc would prefer that the definition specifY that five unrelated people are acceptable rather than four. Councilmember Grant stated that the definition is confusing, as it appears that no more than four people are allowed. Ms. Chaput stated that four people refers only to unrelated people. She added the number of related people is not limited. Councilmember Grant asked whether Mr. Warner's two-family dwelling would be allowed to have ten people if he has two daughters and four renters in each unit. Ms. Chaput stated that four unrelatcd people would be allowed in each houschold as well as an unlimited number of people related by blood, Councilmember Aplikowski stated that ifthe sisters live in separate units, they could each have three unrelated roommates. She added if the house is considered a single family dwelling, the sisters could have four unrelated roommates. Acting Mayor Larson stated that the problem of converting homes to student housing is a problem throughout thc City, adding that Mr. Warner's property is one such home and should be separated from the issuc as a whole, He added this issue has been before thc Council several times as many residents arc concerned with how student housing affects ncighborhoods and property values. Acting Mayor Larson statcd that, in his opinion, four unrclated people is a reasonable number. He added the Planning Commission recommended it as reasonable, and expressed his agreement with their recommendation. Acting Mayor Larson stated he reviewed the zoning ordinance and found only two instances of thc use of the definition for "household". He added that he would suggest deleting the definition for "household" and inserting "Scc Family", which would accomplish the same end and would be less confusing, Councilmember Aplikowski stated that the definition of "household" was included to explain why it was used in the definition of "family". Council member Rem statcd the definition of "household" tends to be more inclusive than the definition of "family". . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14,2000 6 Acting Mayor Larson stated, with regard to the definition of "family", that two categories are possible: all people in the home are related, or the home contains some unrelated individuals, Councilmember Grant expressed agreement with that interprctation, adding it seems restrictive. Ms. Chaput stated that the wording could be changed to clarify that all the residents need not be related. Councilmember Aplikowski asked whether there are currently other neighborhoods within the City with similar rental properties, Ms. Chaput confim1ed there are other homes rented to students, Councilmember Rem stated the issue arose because of a home in another neighborhood that was going to be sold for the purpose of converting it to a multiple family use, and residents came to the Council. She added that the Council had felt it was worth addrcssing the issue. Acting Mayor Larson stated that the property to which Councilmember Rem referred was located in an R-I zoning area, Mr. Godeke asked for clarification with rcgard to zoning districts, Ms. Chaput stated that Noble Road is located in an R-2 zone, which allows single and two-family uses. Katie Nelson, 388 Bucher Avenue, Shoreview, stated she currently lives in a home converted for students, and noted that most complaints are related to garbage and parking, She added that the allowed number of unrelated people should be raised. Councilmember Aplikowski proposed a motion pertaining to Item I. Mr. Lynch stated it would be necessary to detcrmine whether the amendments should be adopted individually or as a whole. Acting Mayor Larson stated he would not support the motion. He added that, in his opinion, four unrelated people is sufficient. Councilmember Grant asked whether, in the Mayor's absence, the voting on the motion would require a four/fifths majority. Mr. Lynch confirmed that a super majority would be required, He added that thc ordinance an1endments should be adopted as a whole and not section by section. Councilmember Rem agreed, stating the amendments were put forward as a single planning case, Ms, Chaput stated that the Council's recommendations would bc incorporated into a formal document for approval at the Council's next meeting, Ms. Chaput reviewed amendments to Section 11 (D), Definitions; Section VI (Al #5, Size; and Section VI (F) # I h, Parking Structures, with regard to Item 2, pertaining to accessory structures. The definition for "building, accessory" is not inclusive of all structures. Since there are restrictions on accessory buildings, it should be clearly defined, Also, there is no limit on the amount of accessory structures permitted. The accessory structure setbacks are in conflict in some sections (10' for accessory but some principle structures only require a 5' setback) so this language is proposed to be amended, Finally, the term "parking structure" is not defined in the code so it has been amended for "private garagc" which is defined. . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14,2000 7 Mr. Wenzel asked whether a fishhouse would be considered an accessory structure, adding he has a neighbor with six fishhouses in his back yard. Ms. Chaput confirmed it would be considered an accessory structure. Ms. Chaput reviewed amendments to Section VI (F) #3, Traffic and Circulation, with regard to Item 3, pertaining to accessibility to public streets. It is not clear in the ordinance that all newly created properties need to abut a public street. The only information that is provided does not refer to all districts, Ms, Chaput reviewed amendments to Section VI (F) #1 C, Construction Standards, and Section VI (F), #3 C, Driveways, with regard to Item 4, pertaining to driveways, The number of driveways or curb cuts for a residential property is not limited. There are no requirements to pave driveway surfaces, setbacks to a driveway or permitted parking locations on a lot. Complaints regarding the number of vehicles on a property at one time are addressed by limiting the number of vehicles permitted outside of a garage, Other cities were researched specifically on this issue and it was found that it was generally dealt with by limiting the width of a driveway whicb in turn limits thc number ofvehic1es that can park at any given time, Generally, cities have a minimum (not maximum) number of spaces required of two per dwelling unit. The proposed number of a maximum of three cars on a dri veway was a result of Planning Commission discussion and thc proposed number has not changed from further research. Finally, State and County regulations for streets should be confirmed with these regulatory bodies at that time and the code should not list their requirements, in the case that they have changed or are incorrect. Mr. Peters stated that changes to this section would have a major affect on his client's use of his property. He added the garage on tbe property had been converted to a study area and the driveway widened with the necessary permits. He noted the amendment should be broadened to take multiple dwelling units into account. Councilmember Aplikowski stated that some property owners have cireular driveways, Ms. Chaput stated they ean remain until the driveway is changed in some way, She added the amendment is intended to provide limitations to prevent such uses from occurring in the future, Councilmember Aplikowski stated that lots of a certain size might be able to accommodate more than one access, She added, in her opinion, the City should not restrict that. Ms. Chaput reiterated that there are currently no restrictions at all. Councilmember Rem stated that points of street access was the concern, adding that large lots don't necessarily need two entrances. She added the amendments are not intended to limit resident's preferences. Councilmember Grant stated that many homes have landscaping rock whieh is used for parking purposes, He asked for clarification with regard to the term "directly into a garage" to define ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14,2000 8 parking areas, Ms. Chapnt agreed that it would not make sense if there were no garage on the . property and it shonld be changed accordingly. Acting Mayor Larson stated that the word "those" should be replaced with "these" nnder "Construction Standards", He agreed that the term "directly into a garage" is not necessary, He added he is comfortable with the limit of three vehicles in the driveway, but agreed this could be a problem for multiple family dwellings. Mr. Lynch stated, with regard to voting on the ordinance amendments, that the Planning Commission prepared the ordinance changes with recommendations for adoption, and must be adopted by a four/fifths vote of all members of tile Council. Councilmember Aplikowski statcd that numerous residents do not have paved driveways, adding she is unwilling to impose restrictions on residents who are not causing any problems, She expresscd concern that the Council is attempting to appease a few complainants by restricting thc entire community. Acting Mayor Larson stated that the City will not require properties which currently do not meet the requirements to be in immediate compliance. Ms. Chaput agreed, adding that residents will be required to conform when they attempt to improve that portion of the property that is being affccted. . Ms, Chaput reviewed amendments to Section VI (E) #4 D, Barbs or Spikes on Fences, with regard to Item 5, pertaining to fences, Thc City does not have any agricultural districts, yet there arc regulations for agricultural fences and agricultural uses, From a planning perspective, encouraging agricultural uses do not meet the intentions of the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Aplikowski asked how businesses would be affected. Ms. Chaput stated they would be required to obtain a Special Use Permit for their electric or barbcd fences. Ms, Chaput reviewed amendments to Section IX (H), Amortization of Nonconforming Use, with regard to Item 6, pertaining to amortization, In the 1999 Legislative Session, the City's power to amortize land uses was revoked, as stated in Chapter 96-S.F. No, 854. The only uses that a city may amortize are those relating to, " . , , adult-only bookstores, adults-only theatres, or similar adults-only business as defined by ordinance, . ," and for". ' , the prevention or abatement of nuisances. . . or eliminating a use determined to be a public nuisance. . .". Therefore, the language that is currently in the Zoning Ordinance regarding amortizing nonconforming uses should be revised, Acting Mayor Larson stated he had raised the issue of omitting the statute language in case it might change. He added that he was attempting to referencc the fact that the City can amortize whatever is allowed to be amortized, but not that the City has the authority to enact an ordinance, He noted he would prefer to retain the amendment as originally written. . Ms. Chaput reviewed amendments and renumbering of all pages, Sections and the Table of Contents in the City of Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance, with regard to Item 7, pertaining to the . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14,2000 9 ordinance numbering system, The numbering system of the ordinance is currently in Roman numerals and is difficult to follow. Staff proposes that this be changed for ease of use as well as the page numbering system, numbering pages from one (1) to the last page of the document. Also, for ease of future revisions, the document should be placed in a binder with section tabs. MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve changes to Item 1 of Plmming Case #00-11, as outlined in the staff memo dated August 2, 2000, Definitions of "dwelling", "dwelling unit", and "family", with the following amendments: Item 53. Family, Replace "four" with "five"; delete "some or all of whom"; replace "are" with "who need not be", Voting on the motion: Aplikowski, Rem and Grant voted aye. Larson voted nay. The motion failed (3-1), COLmcilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to approve changes to Item 2 of Planning Case #00-11, as outlined in the staff memo dated August 2, 2000, pertaining to Accessory Structures. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to approve changes to Item 3 of Planning Case #00-11, as outlined in tlle staff memo dated August 2, 2000, pertaining to access to a public street. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). Councilmember Grant moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve changes to Item 4 of Planning Case #00-11, as outlined in the staff memo dated August 2, 2000, pertaining to driveways, with the following anlendments: Section VI (F) # I C, Construction Standards, replace "Those" with "These" Section VI (F) #3 C, Driveways, (7) Prohibited Areas, delete "leading directly into a garage" and "on a regular basis"; replace "three" with "four" Voting on the motion: Larson and Rem voted aye. Aplikowski and Grant voted nay. The motion failed (2-2), Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to approve changes to Item 5 of Planning Case #00-11, as outlined in the staff memo dated August 2, 2000, pertaining to electric fences, The motion carried unanimously (4-0). Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Grant seconded a motion to approve changes to Item 6 of Planning Case #00-11, as outlined in the staff . . . ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14,2000 10 memo dated August 2, 2000, pertaining to amortization. The motion carried unanimously (4-0), MOTION: Council member Grant moved and Councilmember Aplikowski seconded a motion to approve changes to Item 7 of Planning Case #00-11, as outlined in the staff memo dated August 2, 2000, pertaining to the numbering system of the ordinllilce. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). Acting Mayor Larson stated that City staff has the approval necessary to proceed with five of the seven proposed changes, Councilmember Aplikowski suggested the remaining changes might be discussed at a worksession with the Planning Commission. Acting Mayor Larson stated the City Attorney's input would also have been helpful. C. Hunters Park Request Mr. Lynch stated the audience members had left the meeting but requested that the Hunters Park Request portion of the agenda be held over until thc Council's next meeting, Acting Mayor Larson asked whether it was necessary to act on the item. Mr. Lynch stated a delay would give staffthe opportunity to research the situation further. Acting Mayor Larson stated that the Ingerson Task Force was scheduled for the Council's August 28 meeting, adding the Hunters Park request might be discussed at a meeting with fewer agenda items, Councilmember Rem stated the tenant's organization should be notified that the item had been held over, and when it would be discussed. Councilmember Grant stated he is awarc that affordable housing in the area is extremely limited. Council member Aplikowski stated that affordable subsidized housing is necessary. ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS Mr. Lynch reminded the Council ofthe special meeting to be held August 15 at 8:00 p.m, in Council chambers, COUNCIL COMMENTS AND COMMITTEE/COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS Councilmember Grant stated that the Parks & Recreation Committee will meet on August 22. Councilmember Grant stated that the AMM'S Metropolitan Agencies Committee met to discuss affordable housing, He added their upcoming meeting is schedulcd for Thursday August 17 at which water quality will be discussed. Councilmember Aplikowski stated, in her opinion, it is not the City's responsibility to advocate on behal f of the Hunters Park residents. She added a petition might be made to the County or another party. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - AUGUST 14, 2000 11 Councilmember Aplikowski noted that two Planning Commissioners, Marty Rye and Brent . Nelson, will be leaving, and thanked them on behalf of the Council for their hard work. COlillcilmember Aplikowski stated that the Newsletter Committee did an excellent job on the water quality report. Councilmember Aplikowski stated she will attend the AMM meeting to be held August 15, Councilmember Rem stated the National Night Out on August 1 was a success, adding that the Fire Department visited the neighborhoods, Councilmember Rem stated the RAB met on August 7 and reviewed remediation updates, Couneilmember Rem stated the Turtleman Triathlon was held recently in Shoreview, all proceeds from which will go to the Northwest Youth and Family Services, Councilmember Rem stated that a County budget proposal to cut diversion funding would greatly affect the Northwest Youth and Family Services, Councilmember Rem stated she has had positive comments Irom residents with regard to the water quality brochure and Parks & Recreation brochure. . Councilmember Rem stated the Operations & Finance Committee is scheduled to meet Thursday August 17. Acting Mayor Larson stated the Planning Commission met on Wednesday August 2. He added there was a discussion regarding the Gateway business areas, as well as the antenna request. He noted both issues will he presented to the Council at their August 28 meeting, ADJOURN Councilmember Aplikowski moved and Councilmember Rem seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:12 p.m, The motion carried unanimously (4-0), MOTION: ~ J ~ynch . y Administrator NOTICE OF MEETINGS . The next regular City Council meeting "ill be held Monday, August 28, 2000 at 7:30 p,m. at the Arden Hills Council chambers.