Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 07-12-1982 ~ . Minutes of Regular Council Meeting Village of Arden Hills Monday, July 12, 1982- 7:30 p.m. Call to Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Acting Mayor Diane McAllister called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. Roll Csll Present - Acting Mayor Diane McAllister, Councilmen Thomas Mulcahy, Dale Hicks, Maurice Johnson -. Absent - Mayor Robert Woodburn Also Present - Engineer Donald Christoffersen, Treasurer Donald Lamb, Planner Orlyn Miller, Clerk Administrstor Charlotte McNiesh, Deputy Clerk Dorothy Zehm Approval of Minutes Johnson moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of June 28th be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Business from the floor Tim Tuggle (James Circle) referred to a copy of a letter to Ramsey County from the City relative to suggested changes to the County map; map shows road connection to Floral Park from Royal Hills Plat (2-14-80); asked why street connection was shown prior to its existence. Deputy Clerk reported that she sent names of proposed streets and apparent map corrections to the County at its request; County wanted potential ss well ss existing streets to up-date its map. Royal Hills plat was under considerstion at that time; consequently the proposed streets were included, ss were the proposed streets in Arden Oaks, Briarknoll 11 and McClung 2nd Addition. Tuggle requested that rules and regulations be adopted for Coun- cil appointments; asked why seven people applied after the deadline. It was explained thst the deadline was extended; do not know why the seven people applied for appointment. . Tuggle suggested that a park board be established that would have a voice in the vote. It was explained that the current form of government (Plan A) is a 5-member elected Council; Committees and Commissions are advisory to the Council. Tuggle asked how this form of government can be changed. It was explained that larger cities under Plan B have a City Manager who makes certain admini- strative decisions; do not know of a form of government, at lesst in this area, that gives the park board a vote (possibly Minneapo- lis) . Tuggle asked how they can pursue not putting "black diamond" on the City streets. It was explained that the Public Works Committee has recommended the use of "black diamond/salt/sand" on the City streets next sesson. It wss suggested that the matter be discussed with the Public Works Committee (next meeting is Wednesday, July 21st). It was noted that the Public Works Committee recommendation was based on the cost differential ($2500t savings); black diamond mix stays on the streets longer; noted the Committee was concerned and cognizant of the bike tire problem. Tuggle noted that the Minutes of the June 28th meeting did not include Council's request for Engineer to prepare some sketches on possible turn lanes at Floral/Hamline intersection, Johnson.moved to rescind approval of the Minutes of June 28th as submitted, seconded by Mulcahy. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Minutes of Regulsr Council Meeting July 12, 1982 Page Two .. . Johnson moved, seconded by Hicks, that the Minutes of June 28th be amended to include Council's request that a s~etch of the Floral and Hamline intersection suggested turn lanes be prepared by Christ- offersen for Council's consideration. Motion carried unanimou~ly (4-0) . REPORT OF VILLAGE ATTORNEY JAMES LYNDEN (Absent) Ordinance No. 225, Providing for the Licensing and Regulating the Conduct of Certain Gambling Devices Operations . Johnson moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council introduce by title ORDINANCE NO. 225, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ARDEN HILLS CODE BY CREATING A NEW DIVISION 4 IN ARTICLE 1 OF CHAPTER 4 THEREOF ENTITLED "GAMBLING DEVICES", WHICH CONTAINS PROVISIONS FOR THE LICENSING AND REGULATION OF THE OPERATION OF CERTAIN GAMBLING DEVICES; AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF. Motion csrried unan- imous ly (4-0). REPORT OF VILLAGE ENGINEER DONALD CHRISTOFFERSEN Improvement No. 81-5, Royal Hills: A. Tschida Request re Road Location Council was referred to McNiesh's memo re Tschida's concern about the proposed Royal Lane 15 ft from their property line (about 25 ft from their garage); feels safety of their property was not given proper consideration; suggests that the road be moved to the east. In discussion of appropriate building setback, Miller noted that when the houses in this area were built, the corner side setback requirement was 20 ft (current requirement is 40 ft); Mr. Tschida said the house across Floral Drive from him (Hustings) is 45 ft from the road; feels 13 ft from his property line is too close; requested 45 ft from his garage to the street. It was noted that each 5 ft the road is moved to the east, it reduces the park area esst of the road by 10,OOOt sq. ft. (.2 acre). Hicks moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council approve a change order to move the road centerline 5 ft to the esst (about 33 ft from garage to curb line). In further discussion, Council asked for comments from the floor relative to taking .2 acres more of park land in order to provide the additional setback from the Tschida property. Wilma Kuhn said her original concern was to retain as much . park land as possible; still feels the same way. Monica Tuggle said she feels the road should be stopped in a cul-de-sac and a connection be made to Snelling instead. Tim Tuggle said the City may as well take the additional .2 acres; makes no difference. R. Hanson suggested the possibility of orienting the road at an angle, removing the rosd from the Tschida property. Wilma Kuhn asked if a vsriance is required if original plan is followed. It was explained that as long as the variance is recognized, it can be accepted by the Council. Miller -2- Minutes of Regular Council Meeting July 12, 1982 Page Three noted that the only problem the variance would cause for the Tschida house would be if they wish to expand in an easterly direction. G. Singer said he would vote for the additionsl 5' or 10'; Tschida will have s road on three sides of their lot. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). B. Approvs1 of Park Dedication Council was referred to letter from developer Eibensteiner (7-1-82) offering $9.500.00 park dedication for Roysl Hills, payable @ $593.75/lot at application for Building Permit; total to be paid by August 1, 1984. . Hicks moved, seconded by Mulcahy, thst Council accept the $9,500.00 as satisfaction of the Royal Hills park dedica- tion, payable at the rate of $593.75/ Building Permit; total to be paid by August 1, 1984. Motion csrried unanimously (4-0). Wilma Kuhn ssked if this money would go for the development of Floral Park. It was explained that the park dedication money is placed 'in the "park fund" for the improvement of the City parks; is not ear-marked for a specific park. C. Resolution No. 82-35, Awarding Bid Hicks moved, seconded by Johnson, that Council adopt Resolution No. 82-35, Awarding the Bid to C.W. Houle for the Royal Hills Improvements. Motion carried unanimously (4-0) ; Resolution No. 82-38, Rescindtng Resolution No. 81-52 and Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment Roll, Improvement No. P-80-l, County Road E After review of transparency indicating the total expenditure @ $516,166 and the proposed financing thereof, Johnson moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council adopt Resolution No. 82-38. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Resolution No. 82-39, Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessment Roll, Improvement No. ST-81-2. Storm Drainage, Lexington/fi94 .. After review of transparency indicating the total expenditures @ $772,554 and the proposed financing thereof, Johnson moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council adopt Resolution No. 82-39. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). . Resolution No. 82-40, Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll, Improvement No. P-81-1, Grey Fox Road After review of transparency indicating the tots1 expenditures @ $285,790 and the proposed financing thereof, Hicks moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council adopt Resolution No. 82-40. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Floral Drive/Hamline Avenue Turn-Lane Sketch Christoffersen reported he has referred the matter to the Short-Elliott- Hendrickson traffic engineer for study; does not have s sketch for Council's consideration tonight. -3- Hinutes of Regular Council Meeting July 12, 1982 Page Four REPORT OF VILLACE PLANNER ORLYN MILLER Case No. 82-12, Minor Subdivision - Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Arden Hills No.2, 1429 Skiles Lane Council was referred to Planning memo and transpsrencies of attach- ments thereto, to the recommendations of the Planning Commission (minutes of 7-7-82) and to two alternate lot surveys submitted by the applicant. Miller described the proposal to re-subdivide two existing lots on which the house exists to create two lots oriented north and south, . instead of east and west. Miller noted that Lot A (proposed for future development) provides for a substsntial builaing envelope; problem is the significant slope and drainage through the property; reported that the concern is to provide a building site which will not create a water problem for it and/or the existing house on proposed Lot B. In review of the alternate lot surveys, one orienting Lot A to Forest Lane and the other orienting Lot A to Skiles Lane, Sullivan said his preference is that the lot have access from Forest Lane, which he feels would be aesthetically more attractive for the exist- ing house. Sullivan said either would be acceptable. Sullivan said thst when the street psving was done, a culvert was installed which causes water to cross his property. Sullivan said he did experience a water problem in the 1978 heavy rain, but has not had a problem before or afterwards. Christoffersen explained that the property currently serves as a detention basin; feels some concern should be given to filling the storage area which wilL result in raising the water level higher than in 1978. Sullivan said he does not believe this would happen, but feels City should do something about the culvert. The reason for the "dog-leg" configuration was queried; also quest- ioned was smount of fill to bring the lot to the desired contour. Miller said this has not been determined; proposed grading plans were just received tonight. After discussion, Hicks moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council table its action until the Planner and Engineer consider the amount of proposed fill (assuming access from Forest Lane), whether a drainsge problem will be increased by the proposal and how the proposal will impact properties downstream in the event of a 100-yaar storm. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Miller was asked to slso comment on the "dog-leg" lot line proposed. In further discussion, concern was expressed relative to effect- uation of an approved drainage plan and how City can be assured it will be followed. Some suggestions were to require owner to approve a covenant to recognize the drainage plan to be sttached to the title when property is sold, regulate property by PUD permit or to . require dedicated drainage easement. Case No. 82-lIA, Planned Unit Development for Duplex on Two _ Adioining Lots, 3129 New Brighton Road Council was referred to Planning memo (6-30-82), transparency of the duplex site, recommendations of the Planning Commission (minutes of 7-7-82) and to Cer'tifica.te of Survey of the proposed lots on which the site amenities are sketched as they currently exist (devel- opment plan). Miller explained that the purpose of the pun is to control the use of the land - to "lock in" the duplex use, even after the existing building is gone; explained that waiver of the extensive Planned Unit Development submissions is recommended, since the building exists and the project is minor in size. -4- Minutes of Regular Council Meeting .July 12, 1982 Psge Five Miller noted that site changes, other than painting, normal main- tenance and repair, would require an amendment to the Planned Unit Development permit; suggested the Certified Survey(Develop- ment Agreement) be considered the official drawing and be attached to the permit. Hicks moved to waive the normal PUD submission requirements and approve issuance of Planned Unit Development Permit for duplex use of the two proposed lots (Survey, dated May.18, 1982), subject to the follow- ing conditions: a. The property to be used for duplex only. If the existing structure is removed or destroyed, the individual lots of the Planned Unit Development shall not be used for single-family residences or any other use permitted in the district with- out City Council approval. . b. The exterior of the duplex structure shsll not be physically altered without City Council approval through the PUD smendment process. Painting and normal maintenance and repair shall be excluded from this requirement. c. The exterior design and appearance of the sep- arate dwelling units shall be treated in a uniform manner. This shall include items such as paint color, shingles, window treat- ment, walk and driveway surfacing snd yard fencing. Motion .carried unanimously (4-0). Case No. 82-13, Lot Split and Variances - 1893 Beckmsn Avenue Council was referred to Planning memo (6-28-82), Bosrd of Appeals report (7-1-82), Planning Commission recommendations (minutes of 7-7-82) and to transparancies of the 150' x 150' lot which appli- cant proposes to split into two 75' x 150' lots. Miller noted that the lots exceed the 11,000 sq. ft area require- ment, but both lots will require width variances (corner lot 20', easterly lot 10'). Miller noted that the ordinance also requires structure to conform with prevailing setback in the ares, but not more than 60'. Miller explained that the prevailing setback on Beckman Avenue and New Brighton Road is 50'-60' and is fairly consistent in the area; noted this setback would reduce the building envelope to about a 10' width; noted that the building envelope at a 40' setback would be marginal, but would be buildable. . Mrs. Teien ssid her builder assured her that a house can be built 30' in width; said she probably can't msintain the property unless she can sell the proposed lot. Miller said the split as shown places the existing house about 9' from the side property line _ could reduce the eas terly lot to 71' (5' setbac.k), which would in- crease the width variance on that lot, but decrease the width var- iance on the corner lot. Mill~ noted thst a 75' lot width is not uncommon in the area. House across Beckman Avenue is setback about 50' from New Brighton Road, but only about 20' from Beckman right-of-way. After discussion of various options, including the possibility of a zero side lot line, a 5' side setback and 40' front setback, John- son moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council table its action pending additional review by Planner for Council's consideration. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). -5- Minutes of Regular Council ~eeting July 12, 1982 Page Six Case No. 82-15, Minor Subdivision - Lots 16 and 17, Block 3, Shady Oaks Addition, 3628 N. Snelling Avenue Council was referred to Planning memo (6-29-82), Board of Appeals report (7-1-82), Planning Commission recommendations (minutes of 7-7-82) and to transparencies of the 2 lot site which the appli- cant proposes to re-subdivide into 3 lots with access from a private road to Snelling Avenue (Old Highway 10). Miller explained that the existing house is on Lot 17. very close to the Lot 16 property line; the existing garage is on Lot 16; both lots are legal lots as they exist, not having been combined previously. Miller explained that all 3 lots meet or exceed the area requirement, but will need width variances. Lot widths, as proposed, are about 80', 85' (95' required), corner lot is about 85' (120' required). Mil.ler noted that it tskes a lot of "bending" to make the proposal work - too many things do not fit; private roads are not permitted, but it would be preferable to not create another drive exiting on Snelling Avenue. . Mr. Loos, applicant, said it is a large parcel, with actually three building elevations for three building sites; noted that the Arden Oaks lots to the north are oriented in a north/south direction, feels these lots would conform to those lots, as pro- posed. Loos said he prefers to not cut into the steep bank for another driveway to Lot 16; the existing lots are very deep; serrain seems to dictate three building levels. In discussion, it was suggested that it appears the proposed middle lot will hold water; suggested a sectional profile be submitted to show how drainage would be handled. Other concerns were the private road, variances on all three lots and the addi- tional access to Snelling to the existing Lot 16. Miller said a "pan-handle" lot could be created (20' on Snelling), which is clumsy, but a possibility for a 2-10t re-subdivision; noted that access to the easterly lot could be by easement or own- ership - ownership is preferable. After discussion, Hicks moved to deny the requested three-lot re-subdivision requested (Case No. 82-15) as proposed and wsive the fee requirement for submission of an alternate re-subdivision of the property without extensive variances. Motion was seconded by Johnson and carried unanimously (4-0). Case No. 80-12, Amended Site Plan, W.W. Grainger, Inc. 7'J(dLvu Council was referred to the original site plan for the W.W, Grainger office/warehouse building on Round Lake Road West previously approved; explained that the Building Permit approval for the building expires July 12th; applicant .desires to build a reduced building with the same exterior and site plan, except the north wall is proposed to be block, instead of pre-cast to allow for future expansion in that di re c tion. . Dave Lange (Pariah Architects) explained that the reason for the delay, and now the reduced building size is the economy; applicant plans the building in 3 instead of 2 ;phases; noted that the reduced building will have 3 truck accesses instead of 4, all water retention remains the same; displayed elevations of the building (pre-cast with metal panels); noted that north and east walls are to be block, painted to match the pre-cast walls; stated that structurally the building is the same; expanded west wall will be pre-cast when building is proposed to be enlarged; all site development will be done at first phase, including parking and landscaping. Johnson moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council a Building Permit as per the amended site plsn approve issuance (6 L ~l). 7-J-f'oZ. of -6- . Hinutes of Regular Council l1eeting JUly 12, 1982 Page Seven Hicks moved to amend the motion by adding amended landscape plan by City Planner". amendment and motion, ss amended, carried /~ Case No. 82-~, Minor Arden "subject to approval Johnson accepted the unanimously (4-0). of Subdivision - Lots 14, 15 and 16, Block 1, Hills, 3510 Siems Court Council wss referred to Planning memo (6-29-82) and transparencies of attachments thereto, and to the recommendations of the Planning Commission (minutes of 7-7-82). . Miller explained that the three existing lots are lots of record; existing house is on two lots; corner lot is 75' in width and vacant; all 3 lots are oriented to Siems Court. Miller explained that the applicant proposes to re-subdivide the three lots, to create a lot oriented to A~den Place for future development. Miller said there is a 20' sewer easement on the created lot, but the lot, as proposed, is a buildable lot in the area; the only apparent problem is drainage. Miller explained that minor fill will accommodate a home site. Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposal, subject to the City Engineer's approval of solution to drainsge. After discussion, Hicks moved, seconded by Johnson, that Council table its action pending City Engineer's recommendstions on how to handle potential drainage of the proposed re-subdivision. Motion carried unsnimously (4-0). (Report to include direction of flow beyond the site (street riRht- of way and beyond). Bid Award - Civil Defense Siren Council was referred to Bid Tabulation of 5 bids received for the 120 decibel Civil Defense Siren to be located on the NSP property north of 1-694, between Old Highway 10 and S.T,H. 10-62; noted that the three-phase equipment and NSP charges increased the cost by about $1,000; reported that the easement has not been received to date; NSP easement will permit City's use of the property to get to the siren to service it. After discussion, Johnson moved, seconded by accept the low bid and award the contract to amount of $11,112.00 and authorize execution City upon receipt of the easement from NSP. ously (4.0.0). Hicks, Gopher of the Motion that Council Electric in the contract l;>y the carried unanim-.. Case No. 82-14, Legislation Relating to Mobile and Msnufactured Homes . McAllister reported that most of the Planning Commission members thought that the City should do something to regulate where mobile homes csn be locsted; some members thought City should "wait and see" before changing our ordinances; reported that the Commission felt the City is susceptible to a dangerous possibility that the legislation may be tested, and a mobile home may be located on an inappropriate residential site. McAllister reported that the Planning Commission hsd concern relative to the City Attorney's opinion and memo. Council concurred that McNiesh relay the Commission's concerns to Attorney Lynden and to enclose a copy of Planner's memo and Planning Commission's recommendations: Other Business Request re Towing Policies - Schoonover Richard Schoonover read his letter to Council, relative to past and present towing service in the area and referred Council to list of Schoonover chsrges. Schoonover gave examples of comparative charges -7- Minutes of Regular Council Meeting July 12, 1982 Page Eight by other towing services (greater than those chsrged by Schoonover); complained that Sheriff deputies are calling for tows from several other tow services, causing a sharp reduction in his tow business. Schoonover suggested there should be a clear-cut policy established for towing; explained he has the trucks needed for all towing needs, while others can only handle a passenger car situation. Schoonover also told of problems encountered by vehicle owners in locating their towed vehicles. Schoonover ssked Arden Hills' help in this *' matter. Ramsey County Sheriff Commander Spencer concurred that Schoonover has done a good job through the years; noted there is no written . policy for calling a tow service; vehicle owner has his choice; patrolman does not have authority to order a certain tow service. Spencer advised that his office is working on s proposed bid situa- tion on a community basis; advised that the individual patrolman makes the decision at present, if owner of vehicle does not have a preference. Spencer said the State Patrol has its own policy and uses certain tow services. Spencer said he feels Rsmsey County Sheriff will have to go to a bid procedure. Schoonover suggested that certain criteria be established in order to bid; noted that Shoreview has referred the matter to its Public Safety Committee for recommendations. After discussion, Johnson moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council refer the mstter to the Public Safety Comm1ttee for discussion and recommendations to Council. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). (Schoonover asked to address the Public Safety Committee.) Finance Committee Recommendations Amusement Arcade Fees Council was referred to the Finance Committee's recommended annual license fees for coin-operated amusement devices and amusement sr- cades. After review and discussion, Hicks moved, seconued by Mulcahy, that Council approve the following annual fees as recommended by the Finance Committee, effective 1-1-83 for existing machines and arcades and pro-rated immediately for any new machines: No. of Devices 1-3 4-10 ove r 10 Annual Fee $60.00/machine $90.00/machine $120.00/machine Arcsde Annual Fee $120.00 Motion carried unanimously (4-0). . (McNiesh to draft appropriate Resolution for adoption of the fees approved.) Final Landscape Inspection and Release of Bond, Evenson Office Building Council was referred to report from Landscape Inspector Ervin Oelke and to the Evenson Office Building Landscspe Plan. After discussion, Johnson moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council accept the Evenson Office Building landscaping and authorize re- lease of the Performance Bond, requesting that it be substituted with Bond or Letter of Credit, in the amount of $2,500, guaranteeing re- placement of the dead stock and pruning as identified in Landscape Inspector's report, prior to July 12, 1983. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). -8- . .. Minutes of Regular Council Meeting July 12, 1982 Page Nine . REPORT OF CLERK ADMINISTRATOR CHARLOTTE McNIESH Clsims and Payroll Hicks moved, seconded by Johnson, that the Claims and Payroll be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). COUNCIL LIAISON REPORTS Parks . Mulcahy reported a call from a neighbor asking what to do about a monkey in his yard; could not reach C.S.O.; reported monkey is still at large in Arden Hills. Mulcahy said he has slides of a suggested proposal to improve con- ditions on Johanna Boulevard and County Road E from the Highway 51 bridge to Presbyterian Homes, which he would like to show to Council at some future time. Council was referred to memo from Buckley (7-12-82) relative to use of Ag-lime for pathway from Norma Avenue to Floral Park. Hicks moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council authorize the Ag-lime surfacing for the Norma Avenue to Floral Park portion of the trail as per memo. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Public Works Hicks advised he will be in the country of Malowi, Africa from August 17th to September 17th; will consequently miss the Public Works Committee meeting of August 21st and Council meetings of August 23, 30 and September 13. Mulcahy offered to attend the Public Works Committee meeting on his beh alf. Adjournment Johnson moved, seconded by Hicks, that the meeting adjourn at 12:33 a.m. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). ~i!ffJJL4 Charlotte McNiesh ~ Clerk Administrator fl~r:vt11?7c ~ Diane McAllister Acting Mayor Notice of Meeting . The next Regular Council Meeting will be held on Monday, July 26, 1982 at 7:30 p.m. at the Village Hall.