Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 11-09-1992 . - . MINUTES CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 9, 1992 7:30 P.M. - City Hall CALL TO ORDER~OLL CALL Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor sather called to order the regular City Council meeting at 7:30 p.m. Present: Mayor Thomas Sather; Councilmembers Dale Hicks, Thomas Mahowald, Paul Malone. Absent: Councilmember Growe. Also present were: Councilmember-Elect Beverly Aplikowski: City At torney, Jerry Filla; City Planner, John Bergly; Clerk Administrator, Dorothy Person; Deputy Clerk/Zoning Administrator, Catherine Iago; and Recording Secretary, Shar Foster. ADOPT AGENDA . Note was made that the original November 9 Council agenda was revised by staff to include one additional consent calendar item "Adopt Resolution No. 92-69 Authorizing Application for Recycling Grant Funds for 1993". MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to adopt the revised November 9, 1992 agenda. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MINUTES Note was made that the minutes of the November 4, 1992 Special Council meeting were not included in Council packets, therefore, those minutes would not be considered for approval at this time. MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to approve the minutes of the October 26, 1992 Regular Council Meeting as prepared. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). CONSENT CALENDAR Administrator Person suggested that Consent Calendar item "a" include the phrase "pending City Attorney review". Council agreed to that addition. . MOTION: Hicks moved, seconded by Malone, to approve the Consent Calendar and authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. Motion carried unanimously (4-0) . . Arden Hills Council 2 November 9, 1992 a. Adopt Resolution No. 92-68 Relating to Apportionment of Assessments Relating to Improvement No. SS-W-89-1 (Cleveland Avenue Lift Station) pending City Attorney review. b. Pay Estimate No.1 (final) Cold In Place Recycling Improvements as Approved by the City Engineer. c. Pay Estimate No.4 (final) 1992 Tiller Lane Street Improvements as Approved by the City Engineer. d. Adopt Resolution No. 92-69 Authorizing Application for Recycling Grant Funds for 1993. e. Approve List of Claims/Payroll. PUBLIC_~OMMENTS REMODELING VALUATION ISSUE pCOTT LARSON, 11~8 BENTON WAY Scott Larson submitted a request to establish a procedure for determining valuation for residential remodeling projects. He reported that on November 2, 1992 he applied for a permit to remodel his basement which reflected an . estimated value of $1,400, based upon the cost of the materials needed for the remodeling project. Larson stated that Building Inspector Kriesel disputed the $1,400 figure and placed a value of $26,113.05 on the remodeling, which reflected a $31.05 per square foot value, on the basis that the lower level met the definition of a story rather than a basement. Larson added that he was not satisfied with the Building Inspector's valuation figure or the manner in which he was treated by the Building Inspector so he appealed to the Administrator for further assistance. Larson reported that his research of Section 304.B of the Building Code supports Larson's valuation. He added that he also contacted the State Code Consultant, Mike Godfrey, who indicated that typically the formula for determining valuation for the type of remodeling Larson plans is cost of material times three. Larson said that when he spoke with Administrator Person she indicated that the valuation dispute may take a number of days to resolve, but he wanted a quicker resolution, so he contacted the Mayor to discuss the matter, and agreed to meet again with the Building Inspector and the Administrator to attempt to settle the issue at the administrative level. . Larson stated that the latest valuation figure discussed with the Building Inspector was $9,000, which the Building Inspector thought was more appropriate than the original $1,400, however, no definite figure has yet been determined. . Arden Hills Council 3 November 9, 1992 Larson requested that 1) The valuation of $9,000 for the remodeling be accepted or an unbiased neighboring City review the matter, 2) A neutral party be allowed to inspect the remodeling, and 3) The City establish a written, consistent procedure and guidelines for determining valuation to make the building permit process more "user friendly". He added that he believes most people don't even apply for permits for this type of remodeling. Administrator Person said staff is attempting to arrive at a figure that is appropriate and mutually agreeable, but that figure must be based upon unbiased facts rather than simply an arbitrary compromise. She agreed that a written policy and appropriate formulas for determining valuation should be established. Person commented that if Larson could submit estimates from independent contractors, those estimates would be helpful in determining valuation so this matter could be settled relatively soon, with a written policy addressing the issue to be established later. Councilmember Hicks referred to the dispute over whether the space is a basement or a story and asked the current ~ condition of the space. Larson replied that the area is the totally enclosed, lower level of a split entry home which has already had plumbing and electricity installed from the original construction. Hicks stated that the Building Inspector's original figure of $26,113.05 may be correct for original construction, but when a space is changed from unfinished to finished, it seems appropriate that calculations be based upon a different formula. Hicks added that he trusts staff will be able to settle the issue. Councilmember Malone agreed that it appears staff is attempting to resolve this issue and he preferred to let that process continue. Council encouraged Larson to continue to work with staff toward a resolution. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS CASE NO. 92-17 REZONE & PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT QQ~TAGE VILLAS OF ARDEN HILLS JOHN ARKELL, DEVELOPER City planner Bergly reported that the applicant in Case No. 92-17, developer John Arkell, is proposing a 60-unit senior . housing development for persons 55 years of age and over in the income level of under $20,000 (one person) or $23,000 (two people). The highlights of the project include: affordability, handicap adaptability, on-site caretaker, meal program, area hospital visits, van/taxi/bus transportation, wellness program, and social events. -------------------- -- ------------ ------ . Arden Hills Council 4 November 9, 1992 Bergly outlined the boundaries of the property proposed to be purchased and the portion of that property which is proposed to be developed. He noted that the proposal calls for a two-story complex with garages. He reported that the Fire Marshall has indicated that fire hydrants should be relocated on this property and the entire building be sprinkled in lieu of a circumferential drive around the building. Bergly stated that the plans call for a bus shelter to be located at the entrance of the development if bus service routes can be revised to service that location. Bergly also stated that outdoor congregate seating areas are planned in the courtyards of the complex. Bergly noted that one issue at the Planning Commission level was the matter of signage for the project. He reported that a satisfactory sign location has now been established which meets setback requirements, and the project's identification sign has now been designed to conform to the sign ordinance relative to size, height, and construction. . Bergly reported that suggestions made by the Planning Commission were taken under advisement by the developer and changes have been made to address Planning Commission concerns. He added that while the proposal generally conforms to the comprehensive plan and technical matters under both the existing ordinance and the proposed revised ordinance, it would require: 1) Waiving of the Development Moratorium, 2) Rezoning from R-2 to R-3 to accommodate the proposed density of approximately 6 and 2/3 units per acre, and 3) Approval of the PUD General Development Plan. Councilmember Hicks recalled that originally about 12 acres were being considered for this project and now there is a 9 acre site. Bergly explained the boundaries of the building site as well as the entire property the developer is purchasing. Councilmember Hicks asked what amount of regrading would be necessary to accommodate this project. Bergly stated the only grading planned is to create a ponding area, and explained that surface water run-off would flow through storm sewer to the ponding area. He added that the contours shown on the map around the rear of the proposed complex . already exist and will require very minor regrading. He pointed out that along the north portion of the property a very small area would be filled and a small wetland would be added. He confirmed that a water management plan must be approved by Rice Creek watershed District, the DNR, and Army . Arden Hills Council 5 November 9, 1992 Corps of Engineers, and application has been made to those agencies, but approval has not yet been granted. Councilmember Malone asked what drainage pattern will be followed to direct overflow surface water away from the property. Bergly stated that apparently water currently flows to the north, but this has not yet been completely researched. Malone cautioned that the matter of drainage must be completely resolved prior to approval. Bergly agreed, and said there are plans to do so. Councilmember Malone commented that conditions recommended by the Planning Commission and Planner appear to be appropriate. He recalled the developer had expressed interest in tax increment financing during earlier discussions for this project. He emphasized that the developer must understand that any approval of the pun or rezoning makes no inference or commitment with regard to tax increment financing. The developer, John Arkell, stated that this evening the . only matters which he expected to go before Council for consideration were the rezoning request and the pun approval. He stated that he understands the matter of tax increment financing is an entirely separate issue; that approval of a rezoning or pun does not infer any commitment to any kind of financing arrangements in the future. Responding to an inquiry from Councilmember Hicks regarding property size and density, Arkell stated that a large portion of the property is undevelopable due to soil conditions or easements and the density of 6 and 2/3 units per acre is calculated using the entire site, not just the developable portion of the site. Frank Reese, the architect for the project, commented that resident, Elizabeth Modesette of 3743 New Brighton Road, noted at the November 4, 1992 Planning Commission meeting that her property stakes appeared to be missing after surveying work for this project. He said he has spoken with Ms. Modesette and it was determined that the stakes had not been removed, but were simply difficult to locate. He assured that concern has been resolved. Bergly suggested a description of the project be included in approval of the rezoning and it be effective at the time of . issuance of a building permit. He stated that a development agreement would address other matters. Councilmember Malone added that approval could be given subject to City Attorney review to assure that everything is in order. councilmember Hicks noted the application does not specifically address the type of project the developer has presented this evening. ------- . Arden Hills Council 6 November 9, 1992 Councilmember Malone commented that Council has been presented this evening with bits and pieces of information and he would prefer the Planner and staff compile an entire package for presentation to Council, including a checklist, so Council may be certain that all elements related to this approval are in place. councilmember Hicks concurred. Councilmember Hicks stated that he prefer to see a comprehensive landscape plan of the entire site rather than just around the building site, specifically to address landscaping plans for the southwest portion of the property. MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to waive the development moratorium ordinance for Case #92-17. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Mahowald, relative to Case #92-17, to rezone the 9-acre property from R-2 to R-3 for the proposed PUD with a density of 6 and 2/3 units per acre as allowed in the proposed zoning ordinance revisions. This rezoning is approved only for the . specific project presented by the applicant this evening and is to be effective at the time of the issuance of the building permit for this specific project. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, relative to Case #92- 17, to approve the PUD General Development Plan and Final Plan for the Cottage Villas of Arden Hills with the following conditions, and subject to successful execution of a Development Agreement between the City and the developer. The Development Agreement, in addition to the usual matters, is to address the following issues: - Park dedication requirements. - Appropriate bonding for landscaping and costs associated with City review and inspection and an escrow account to cover such costs. - Site construction plans. The following conditions are attached to PUD approval: - A parking ratio of one garage space and .5 outside spaces be provided for each unit and .5 spaces per unit (30) be approved as "proof of parking" to be constructed at such time as the City determines . that the need for such additional parking is evident. - The water management plan be approved by Rice Creek Watershed District, DNR, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, copies of any required permits be filed with the City, and measures to improve water ------------- . Arden Hills Council 7 November 9, 1992 quality in the existing pond be investigated in conjunction with these permits. - With regard to fire protection, per the recommendations of the Fire Marshall, the entire complex (including garages) is to be equipped with a suppression sprinkler system, and fire hydrants are to be relocated to the satisfaction of the local Fire Marshall. - A revised landscape plan be submitted and approved, which addresses landscaping of the entire site rather than only the building site. - Congregate areas be established in courtyard areas of the complex. - A bus shelter be provided. - Signage comply with the City's sign ordinance, setback and location requirements. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). CASE NO. 92-19 WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT MORATORIUM . FOR ACCESSORY BUILDING OWEN RASMUSSEN, 2020 THOM DRIVE As background for Case #92-19, Bergly reported that the applicant's lot at 2020 Thorn Drive in an R-2 district, is about 20,000 square feet in area (nearly twice the required R-2 lot size of 11,000 square feet). He explained that the applicant has requested waiver of the development moratorium ordinance to construct a 24 ft. X 40 ft. (960 square foot) 10-foot high eave line garage/storage building on his property. Bergly further explained that current ordinance does not limit the size of such accessory buildings, but the proposed revised zoning ordinance would limit the maximum size of such accessory buildings to 700 square feet. He pointed out that because the applicant's lot is considerably larger than the R-2 minimum lot size, the ratio of the proposed- sized accessory building to the applicant's large lot would be comparable to the ratio of a standard-sized garage to a standard-sized lot. Bergly added that the applicant's home is also considerably larger than other homes in the neighborhood, and the proposed accessory building was part of original plans for . the lot. He stated the applicant was originally advised that the proposed building was consistent with the existing ordinance and was not aware of the recently imposed development moratorium until he applied for a building permit for the accessory building. . Arden Hills Council 8 November 9, 1992 The applicant, Owen Rasmussen, and Bergly reported that on the lot immediately to the west of the applicant's lot is a 30 ft. X 48 ft. (1,440 square foot) 21 ft. high steel pole building. It was further reported that the applicant plans to roof and trim the accessory building in the same color as the house, and install vertical steel siding on the exterior walls in a similar color to the house. Councilmember Malone recalled a solid fence along the south property line of the applicant's property and questioned how the accessory building would be accessed. Bergly stated that there is a crushed rock drive around the north end of the home which would provide access. Councilmember Hicks expressed concern regarding the exterior appearance of the accessory building and whether it would be appropriate in the neighborhood. He stated that he would prefer to see the applicant use horizontal siding to match the house in order to maintain the look of a residential nature rather than an agricultural look. . Rasmussen stated that high tensile strength steel siding is more durable than the usual residential-type horizontal siding and more appropriate for the use of the building. He explained that the building is planned to be constructed with 10-foot high side walls with six feet of pole underground. He added that he has already obtained the materials because he did not expect any problems. Councilmember Malone asked if the applicant would construct the building using different materials if cost were not an issue. Rasmussen answered no. Bergly emphasized that under the proposed revised ordinance, this accessory building would require a variance, but since the building was planned prior to the development moratorium and because the trim, roof and color will be similar to that of the house, he considered the building acceptable. Attorney Filla commented that the purpose of a development moratorium is to prevent nonconformities while the development moratorium is imposed. He advised Council that they are not required to waive the development moratorium and if they agree to a waiver, they may attach conditions. Rasmussen informed that in addition to the color and trim of the exterior of the building matching the house, his yard is . quite wooded so the accessory building would be barely visible from the street. Councilmember Hicks commented that though the building may not be very visible from the street, it would be very visible from the north and may detract from the aesthetics of the applicant's home and the neighborhood. . Arden Hills Council 9 November 9, 1992 Councilmember Mahowald stated that while he understands Councilmember Hicks' concerns, he does not think the Council is in a position to dictate the type of building or materials as long as construction conforms to requirements. Councilmember Malone advised the applicant that if the proposed building were allowed, it would be nonconforming in size, and if it should be destroyed sometime in the future by fire or weather, etc., and the owner wishes to rebuild, the rebuilding would be subject to then current ordinances. The applicant indicated he understood. MOTION: Mahowald moved, seconded by Hicks, to waive the development moratorium ordinance relative to Case #92- 19, based upon the findings and recommendations of the City Planner, with the understanding that the proposed accessory building will be nonconforming under the proposed revised ordinance, therefore, if the building would ever need to be replaced, its replacement must comply with then current ordinances. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). . CASE NO. 92-20 SIDE YARD VARIANCE 1727 CHATHAM AVENUE BICK & SHERILYN HANSON Planner Bergly explained that the applicants, Rick and Sherilyn Hanson, are requesting a variance to the required lO-foot side yard setback in the R-1 district, to allow them to build a 4 ft. wide addition onto the west side of their home which would encroach 4 ft. into the side yard setback. Bergly further explained that the shape of the applicants' lot is irregular, the lot is tapered and the house is not parallel with the side lot lines, so the home was designed with a jog in the west wall to avoid encroachment on the side yard setback. Bergly pointed out that the house to the west has an identical design along its east wall (which faces the applicant's home). He recommended denial of the variance on the basis that no hardship has been demonstrated, the applicant may put the property to reasonable use without the variance, and if the encroachment were allowed it may negatively affect the living space of both the applicant's home and their neighbor to the west. ~ Councilmember Hicks emphasized that while this requested encroachment does not appear significant, it is important to remember that the lots in this development are quite small and homes are built to the limits of setback requirements. . Arden Hills Council 10 November 9, 1992 MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to deny the request for a side yard setback variance, Case #92-20, as sufficient hardship in support of such variance has not been demonstrated. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). 'l'..c.!:L....J21-__MEJ:)IAN CLOSING REQUEST FOR ALTERNATIVES Jean Lemberg, 1401 Skiles Lane, reported that she received a letter from MnDOT stating that the issue of closing the T.H. 51 median cannot be revisited and suggesting the City explore alternate ways of accessing the surrounding neighborhoods. Lemberg said she has spoken with Councilmember Growe and they arrived at a list of persons who should be involved in such a meeting, that list incl uded: Mayor Sather Public Works Superintendent Winkel Councilmembers Ramsey County Commissioner McCarty Jean Lemberg MnDOT Metro Division Engineer O'Keefe . City Engineer Ramsey County Engineer Public Safety Committee Chair Mayor sather stated that the Council recognizes the inconvenience created by the median closing and is also hopeful of finding alternatives. He suggested that County Commissioner-elect Wedell also be invited to attend the meeting. Administrator Person was directed to arrange a meeting amongst those persons listed above. Councilmember Hicks suggested the agenda include discussion of the matter of County Road E west of T.H. 51 and what measures might be appropriate, such as restriping or creating turn lanes, to provide smoother traffic flow and access through that area. Council and Lemberg concurred. PISQllpSION OF REFERENDUM #1 ~kECTION RESULTS FQR BONDING QL.l'PjlLIQ_WORKS FACILITY Mahowald commented that alternatives need to be explored in light of the referendum results. He stated that a significant portion of the money needed to build a new City Hall is dependent upon the sale of the existing City Hall, and if the City's public works facility remains at its . present site, that potential sale is complicated. Mahowald added that a decision must be made as to whether the arsenal property is going to continue to be pursued; he believed pursuit should continue as the arsenal property appears to be the best location for a City Hall. He stated _____n__n_ . Arden Hills Council 11 November 9, 1992 that perhaps if the arsenal property were to only be used as the City Hall, it may be easier to obtain. Administrator Person commented that various financing options are available, or the Council can wait six months and conduct another referendum. she reported that many citizens have expressed disappointment and volunteered to assist in community awareness before another referendum. Mayor Sather stated that the failed referendum is especially disappointing since it fail ed by such a small margin. He reported that the DNR has expressed an interest in the arsenal property to preserve the wildlife there, but he believes that a City Hall on that property might be able to accommodate some of the DNR needs. councilmember Malone stated the referendum results were surprising and he believes the failure is due to apathy and lack of voter awareness. Jean Lemberg, 1401 Skiles Lane, stated that Ramsey County is . in need of additional public works space and perhaps a joint venture could be explored. Mayor Sather and councilmember Malone said that possibility has been explored, but it appears the needs of the City and the County are quite different and the County prefers a more central location. Mayor Sather added that a joint Arden Hills City Hall/Ramsey County Service Building has also been explored. Councilmember-elect, Beverly Aplikowski, stated that she has received calls expressing disappointment; she suggested a citizen's Group be activated to help in community awareness. Councilmember Hicks commented that another vote would likely turn out differently. Councilmember Malone emphasized that before a second vote, improved education of the community is a necessity. Council directed Administrator Person to compile a list of alternatives in this matter. COUNCIL COMMENTS REVISED ZONING ORDINANCE Administrator Person stated that a date of December 2 has been suggested for a joint meeting between Council and the Planning Commission to discuss proposed revised zoning ordinance. . ------- ---- . Arden Hills Council 12 November 9, 1992 MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to schedule a joint meeting between Council and the Planning Commission on December 2, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. to discuss revisions to the City's zoning ordinance. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). ESTABLISHING PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING VALUATIONS Councilmember Hicks referred to the issue discussed this evening under "Public Comments", He encouraged staff to require Mr. Larson to submit only one estimate from an independent contractor relative to his plans for remodeling his lower 1 evel , that requiring more than one estimate seems to place an undue burden on the applicant. FINANCE MEETING REMINDER Councilmember Malone reminded that the next meeting of the Finance Committee will be held November 18, 1992. . GR09ERY STORE IN THE CITY Councilmember Malone referred to a letter received from a resident requesting a grocery store in the City. He commented that he would also like to see a grocery store revitalized in the City since the former grocery store is closed, but the Counci 1 has no power to initiate a grocery store other than giving strong consideration to such a proposal if one comes forth. ~J2.;r~lJRN MOTION: Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to adjourn the meeting at 9:32 p,m. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Thomas R. Sather, Mayor Dorothy A. Person, Clerk Administrator NOTICE OF MEETINGS: A Council worksession will be held November 16, 1992 at 4:30 p.m. . The next regular Council meeting will be held November 30, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall.