HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 06-29-1992
.
.
.
. --
MINUTES
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 29, 1992
7:30 P.M. - City Hall
CALL TO ORD~R/ROLL CALL
Note Council met at 6:30 p.m. with the architect to discuss
new City Hall plans.
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 JoAnn Growe,
Dale Hicks, Paul Malone. Council absent: Thomas Mahowald.
Also present were: City Engineer, Mark Graham; Public Works
Superintendent, Dan Winkel; Acting Clerk Administrator,
Catherine Iago; Recording Secretary, Foster.
~DOPT AGEND~
With regard to agenda item 8C "Discussion on site Plan
Review Application - Dennis Foster", Council agreed to a
request from the applicant's attorney to postpone that item
until the July 13, 1992 Council meeting.
MOTION:
Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to adopt the June 29,
1992 agenda excluding item 8C. Motion carried
unanimously (4-0).
APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MI~M~~~
with regard to "Budget Information" on page 16 of the June
8, 1992 Council minutes, Counci1member Malone requested the
second paragraph be revised to read that he was "satisfied
with the completeness of the report provided by Mr. Post".
MOTION:
Malone moved, seconded by Growe, to approve the minutes
of the June 8, 1992 Regular Council Meeting as
prepared. Motion carried unanimously (4-0).
CONSENT CALENDAB
MOTION:
Hicks moved, seconded by Growe to approve the Consent
Calendar and authorize execution of all necessary
documents contained therein. Motion carried
unanimously (4-0).
a. Approve Final Estimate (Pay Estimate #1) - 1992
Bike Trail Improvements.
b. Adopt Resolution No. 92-43 pot-a-Gold Bingo Hall
Application License.
.
.
.
Arden Hills Council
2
June 29, 1992
c. Acknowledge Receipt of Recruitment Procedures and
Authorize Expenditure to The Brimeyer Group,
Inc. - City Administrator Recruitment.
d. Acknowledge Trade Name and Corporate Officer
Changes for On-Sale Licensee, Minneapolis Motel
Enterprises, Inc./dba Ramada Inn.
e. Authorize Hiring Replacement Seasonal Employees.
f. Approve List of Claims/Payroll.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public comments.
PUBLlg HEARINGS
IMPROVEMEN~ HEARING FOR ARDEN PLACE
Mayor Sather opened the meeting at 7:36 p.m. for the purpose
of conducting a public hearing on Arden place Drainage
Improvement. Acting Clerk Administrator Iago verified
publication of the notice of hearing in the New Brighton
Bulletin on Wednesday, June 17 and 24, and mailing to
affected property owners on June 17, 1992.
City Engineer Graham reported that in September, 1991, a
feasibility study and plans and specifications were prepared
to replace an existing drainage pipe that extends from the
low area behind 1553 Arden Place to the south across Arden
Place, and between 1540 and 1548 Arden Place. He added that
the cost of the project was estimated at $20,800 (including
the lowest construction bid of $16,675 and 25% overhead).
He commented that the existing pipe does not appear to be
placed within an easement, but it may be legally possible to
claim a prescriptive easement so no easement acquisition
costs would apply.
Graham stated that questions were raised during October 1991
public hearings on this project relative to easements,
placement of the pipe, cost, and water quality; which led to
further research of alternative options to address this
drainage issue.
Graham explained a second option is to install a pipe to the
Lake Johanna Beach club property, at an estimated cost of
$30,000. This option would cost more than the original
option primarily due to the need for additional length of
pipe. Easement acquisition costs are unknown but Graham
expected a minimal cost.
Graham's preference was the original option of a direct
route to Lake Johanna.
.
.
.
Arden Hills Council
3
June 29, 1992
The following public comments/questions were received:
Deb Thornton, 3510 Siems Court: My neighbors and I will
file a case in District Court if we are assessed on the
basis that we are receiving no benefit and no increased
market value. This problem is between the City and the two
homeowners who are experiencing water problems. An
appraiser would agree that neighbors receive no benefit and
therefore cannot be assessed.
Mayor Sather reminded the public that this evening's meeting
is to receive input with regard to the project itself, that
assessment concerns will be addressed at a later assessment
hearing, if such a hearing is necessary.
Arnold Lindberg, 3520 Siems Court: I concur with Ms.
Thornton. The option of routing to Lake Johanna Beach club
has merit. The option of a direct route to Lake Johanna
involves easement and ecological concerns. While there is a
definite need to address the drainage issue, my contention
is that it is the City's problem and should be a paid for by
the City. I will fight an assessment.
Esther Dant, 3511 Ridgewood Road: I concur with Ms.
Thornton. When our neighborhood was developed I was of the
understanding that the existing pipe simply needed cleaning.
The City is responsible to pay the cost of addressing the
issue.
Brad Lis, 1548 Arden Place: Will my property value be
raised? There is no existing easement through my property
if the direct route to Lake Johanna is used. Has Rice
Creek Watershed District approved the direct route option?
I would like to see their study. Because of fertilizer run-
off, etc, the channel to Lake Johanna will turn into a swamp
if the direct route option is used.
Engineer Graham reported that in discussions with Rice creek
Watershed District they indicated acceptance of the direct
route option; they do have studies available to the public
as to the effect of fertilizers on water supplies.
Dale Noyed, 3505 Ridgewood Road: Why has the cost of the
original option increased? The existing pipe does drain
somewhat. Why not just clean it out? Since the existing
pipe has been in place for years wouldn't the City pick up
the costs now?
Mayor Sather stated that, generally speaking, the City's
assessment policy includes a cost sharing procedure whereby
the City typically pays a sizable portion of costs.
However, the Council has not deliberated as to how the costs
.
.
.
Arden Hills Council
4
June 29, 1992
of this project will be handled.
Engineer Graham and Public Works Superintendent Winkel
reported that the City has attempted to unplug the existing
pipe several times and believe that the pipe is of different
sizes and is possibly broken somewhere which magnifies the
problem. Also it is thought that the existing pipe would
simply plug again in the future, so a permanent solution is
necessary. Graham said the costs discussed at last fall's
public hearing were estimates for construction only.
John Lundgren, 3487 Ridgewood Road: Assuming the direct
route option is used, could the path of the pipe be shifted
somewhat to reduce its effect on my property and potential
tree loss?
Engineer Graham said estimated costs do take tree loss into
consideration.
John Halvorsen, 3517 Ridgewood Road: How is benefit
determined?
Engineer Graham stated that an appraiser determines benefit.
He added that notice of this hearing was sent to all
properties which potentially contribute to the drainage
problem, that simply being invited to this meeting does not
imply a potential assessment, that potentially assessable
property owners will be determined at a later time.
Deb Thornton, 3510 Siems Court: I am an attorney and my
research indicates that proving benefit is a necessity
before an assessment can be levied. The City has the
responsibility to provide proper drainage.
Councilmember Malone reiterated that the issue of benefit
for each individual lot will be determined at a later time
as part of the assessment hearing process; that the purpose
of this evening's meeting is to discuss the details of the
improvement.
Arnold Lindberg, 3520 Siems Court:
made as to which option to use, the
acquisition must be answered.
Before a decision can be
question of easement
Engineer Graham stated that it is the City Attorney's
opinion (without a complete study of the issue) that if
there is an existing pipe, there should not be an easement
problem.
Esther Dant, 3511 Ridgewood Road: I am troubled that the
City allowed continued development of the neighborhood when
it was known that the pipe providing drainage was plugged.
.
.
.
Arden Hills Council
5
June 29, 1992
Has Arden Hills considered a storm water utility such as
other cities have adopted?
Councilmember Malone stated that Council is in the process
of considering a storm water utility, but such a program may
not address this type of situation.
Warren McGuire, 1553 Arden place: We were told when we
purchased our property that the existing pipe drained. We
have done some landscaping to our property and hauled in
some fill which has actually improved the drainage problems
being experienced by at the Noyed property at 3505 Ridgewood
Road. (Dale Noyed nodded in agreement.)
Brad Lis, 1548 Arden Place: If the direct route option is
used, I suggest some additional work such as culvert
replacement.
Councilmember Malone asked Graham if placement of the plpe
in the direct route option could be shifted somewhat.
Engineer Graham said that bends in the pipe create problems,
but minor realignment could be studied. Councilmember Growe
asked if tree loss could be avoided if the placement were
shifted. Graham said he would check, but reminded Council
that an existing power pole and the limited construction
path must also be considered.
Councilmember Malone commented that it is clear the
improvement needs to be done, however, questions relative to
easements using either option must be answered prior to a
decision.
MOTION:
Malone moved, seconded by Hicks, to:
1) Direct the City Attorney to determine easement
acquisition costs involved in addressing Arden
Place drainage problems using both of the options
outlined by the City Engineer;
2) Report findings to Council for consideration at
the July 20, 1992 Council worksession;
3) Continue the Arden place Improvement public
hearing at the July 27, 1992 Council meeting.
Motion carried unanimously (4-0).
Councilmember Malone advised the public that Council's July
20 worksession is an open meeting.
Council recessed briefly and reconvened.
.
Arden Hills Council
6
June 29, 1992
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
J2Rljl),;RAJ RE STORA T I or'LA T __.HHl NORTH
SNELLING AVENUE - FRANCIS PODLASEK
Francis podlasek was asked to explain the problems he has
with his driveway. He stated that everything he would say
was included in his letter to the City.
Mr. Podlasek's letter explained that he was dissatisfied
with the steepness of his driveway entrance resulting from
the reconstruction of North Snelling Avenue and appealed to
the City Council for financial reimbursement to reconstruct
his driveway and yard to conform with the new, lower
elevation road in front of his house.
.
Engineer Graham advised that through the process of speaking
with residents before the reconstruction project began, he
discussed with Mr. Podlasek the options available within the
project to address his driveway. Graham reported that he
proposed to Mr. Podlasek extending the bituminous patching
up his driveway to a point 40 feet from the road in an
effort to create a gradual slope to the road; however, Mr.
Podlasek rejected that option and directed Graham to replace
blacktop only to the easement line with a slope not to
exceed 10%.
Graham added that after construction was completed per Mr.
Podlasek's direction and conforming to standards, Mr.
podlasek expressed his dissatisfaction, Graham responded by
letter, and Mr. Podlasek's response was directed to the
Council.
Councilmember Malone stated he has viewed the driveway. He
asked Graham if elevations of the road change after a
project such as this, and who is responsible to address
that. Graham said that in many instances elevations do
change and driveways must be adjusted, that typically the
adjustment takes place within the right-of-way. He added
that the elevation change in this instance was minimal, but
apparently Mr. podlasek disagrees, and the 40 foot driveway
cut was offered to reduce the severity of the slope of the
driveway, but Mr. Podlasek declined. Graham said every
reasonable attempt was made to avoid this problem.
.
Mr. podlasek said some driveways affected by this project
were graded well, but he is dissatisfied with his driveway
because the slope at the end of the driveway causes vehicles
to "bottom out". He emphasized that the old driveway did
not have the severe slope, it was caused by a change in the
elevation of the road. He added that his yard also has a
severe bank which will require landscaping or excavation.
.
Arden Hills Council
7
June 29, 1 992
Mr. Podlasek said he has spoken with contractors as to how
best to address the driveway problem and has been told that
in order to create a constant gradual slope from the garage
slab to the road, fill will need to be excavated. He added
that if he was satisfied with the driveway/road connection,
he could simply repair the old bituminous, but now, because
fill needs to be excavated, he will have to remove the old
bituminous, and will install a concrete driveway. Mr.
Podlasek stated that he only expects the City to share costs
for the removal of the fill, not the cost of new concrete or
old bituminous removal.
Mr. podlasek asked if the City authorizes the City Engineer
to destroy private property and then expect residents to
accept that. Mayor Sather reminded Mr. Podlasek that the
Engineer offered the 40' driveway cut and asked why that was
not acceptable before the project was done. Mr. Podlasek
said that the 40' idea would not address the need for
landscaping the yard alongside the driveway.
.
Mr. Podlasek said the problem was created by removing fill
from the roadbed which lowered the elevation of the road.
Engineer Graham said he did not believe that significant
fill was removed from the road.
Councilmember Hicks commented that he was troubled that Mr.
Podlasek did not accept the 40' driveway cut idea
originally, as it would have been easier and cheaper to have
done that as part of the project rather than trying to
satisfy Mr. Podlasek now.
Councilmember Hicks asked if Graham could calculate the
amount of fill which needs to be excavated from Mr.
Podlasek's driveway to meet the grade that Mr. Podlasek
wants. Graham said he could calculate that amount. Hicks
added that excavation would need to accommodate the base
layer and concrete to be laid on the driveway, which would
amount to about six inches. Mr. Podlasek agreed.
MOT ION:
Hicks moved, seconded by Malone, to direct the City
Engineer to calculate and report to Council the cost to
excavate Mr. Podlasek's driveway to 6" below a constant
gradual slope from the garage slab to the driveway
apron. Motion carried unanimously (4-0).
.
CHARITABLE GAMBLING REGULATION~
REVIEW/RECOMMENDATIONS
Temporary Accountant Post reported that as directed by
Council on .June 15, he reviewed charitable gambling
regulations, talked with the City Attorney, and recommends:
Mandating 100% compliance with the present 10% net
.
.
.
Arden Hills Council
8
June 29, 1992
profit contribution requirement retroactive to 1/1/92;
Council consider imposing a 1% gambling tax.
In recognition of state tax burdens, reduce trade area
spending requirements from 50% to 30%
Initiate the use of a standardized reporting format for
charitable gambling licensees.
Post added that his research revealed that state laws, which
changed after the adoption of the City regulations, make the
City regulations somewhat unrealistic. He added that
definitions of gross profit, net profit, lawful expense,
etc. must be clearly understood by all licensees.
Mayor Sather suggested discussing this issue at the upcoming
worksession. He added that the original intent of the 50%
trade area spending requirement was to encourage local
benefit from charitable gambling. Councilmember Malone
clarified that current City regulations, when practically
applied, simply don't "work" any longer because of the
financial effect of increased state burden on licensees.
Temporary Accountant Post advised that an informal meeting
has been scheduled for July 10, the purpose of which is to
receive input from charitable gambling licensees. Council
agreed to revisit this issue at the July 20 worksession.
DISCU~~lON OF SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPLICATION - DENNIS FOSTER
Per request from Dennis Foster's attorney, Thomas Balyk,
this agenda item was moved to the July 13, 1992 regular
Council agenda.
COUNCIL C9!IcMENT1i
WORKSESSION SCHEp_~~NG
MOTION:
Malone moved, seconded by Growe, to schedule a Council
worksession on July 20, 1992 at 4:30 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously (4-0).
KEITHSON POND
Councilmember Hicks thanked Councilmember Malone for
summarizing the Keithson Pond issue for communication to
residents.
DEFEASANCE OF 1985 BONDS
Temporary Accountant Post updated Council with regard to
defeasance of 1985 bonds and stated that the Finance
Committee has studied this issue and provided
.
.
.
,. ,
Arden Hills Council
9
,June 29, 1992
recommendations. Councilmember Malone explained why it
makes economic sense to payoff these bonds.
SHARED SERYj:S~EJ?_~_gQM!1UNt<::1'>,':J.'IQJ\U?
Councilmember Malone commented that if shared services
communications is still being considered, Arden Hills must
express concern for the potential substantial increased
costs. Acting Clerk Administrator Iago and Public Works
Superintendent Winkel said latest information indicates
shared services communication is unlikely to occur. They
said they would keep Council advised on this issue.
ENGINEER/RESIDENT COMMUNICATION
Public Works Superintendent Winkel reported that, contrary
to this evening's agenda item regarding Mr. Podlasek's
driveway, MSA does an outstanding job of communicating with
residents and the City on construction projects.
ADJOURN
MOTION:
Growe moved, seconded by Malone, to adjourn the meeting
a~10:40 p.m. Motion carried unanimously (4~0).
---'.-
~
./
'/""'~;/iif /\
',-',:.:- /-!'.:.... /
i-i,'~(,/ !
, Deputy Clerk
NOTICE OF MEETINGS:
The next regular Council meeting will be held July 13, 1992 at
7:30 p.m. at City Hall.
The next Council worksession will be held July 20, 1992 at 4:30
p.m.