HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 05-14-1984
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Village of Arden Hills
Monday, May 14, 1984 - 7:30 p.m.
Village Hall
.
Call to Order
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Mayor Woodburn called
the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Roll Call
Present - Mayor Robert Woodburn, Council members Dale Hicks,
Kathleen Rauenhorst, Michael Christiansen, Thomas
Mulcahy
Absent - None
Also Present - Engineer Donald Christoffersen, Treasurer Donald
Lamb, Planner Orlyn Miller, Clerk Administrator
Charlotte McNiesh, Deputy Clerk Dorothy Zehm
Approval of Minutes
Hicks moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that the Minutes of the
April 23, 1984 Council Minutes and Extract of Minutes of City
Council, April 23, 1984 be approved as amended. Motion carried
unanimously. (5-0)
Business from the Floor
~one
REPORT OF VILLAGE PLANNER ORLYN MILLER
Case No. 81-27, Lot Split - George Bona, 4463 Highway 10
Miller reviewed the proposed split of the odd-shaped lot requested
by Mr. Bona in 1981; reported that the split was not approved
because the lots were substandard in depth and one lot was not
considered buildable; noted that the applicant was encouraged to
negotiate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to acquire
additional land needed to provide ~dequate lot depth.
Miller explained that tonight's application is the first step
in a proposed land exchange to accomplish the needed lot depth.
Miller explained that the request tonight is to split a
700't x 20't strip from the Joseph Bussard property which will
later be exchanged for the parcel the applicant wishes to
acquire from U.S.F.W.S. Miller noted that the Planning Commission
recommends approval, with the understanding that an illegal lot
is created until the exchange is accomplished and the parcel
from U.S.F.W.S. is consolidated with the Bona parcel, which is
anticipated to take place within 120 days.
Attorney Jack Bell, representing the Bonas, explained that the
Bonas must have the land in their ownership before the trade can
be made. Bell presented the Warranty Deed, signed by Joseph
Bussard, deeding the strip of land to George and Phyllis Bona.
Bell explained that the applicants are requesting approval of the
deed.
.
Cheryl Grudnoske asked how many feet Bonas need for one additional
lot; explained that it was the understanding of the Round Lake
neighbors that Bonas wanted one additional lot, but since our
meeting they are talking about two additional lots. Grudnoske
explained that a petition was circulated in the neighborhood to
approve the additional lot; noted that confusion arose with the
possible potential of two additional lots. Grudnoske read a
copy of a letter to George Bona, she received today from Edward
S. Crozier, Refuge Manager, (4-18-83) re petition signed by
neighbor, that they do not object to the split of the Bona
property into 3 lots (Bona home lot and two buildable lots) and
requesting that the boundary of the proposed exchange be modified
to increase the square footage to at least 42,000 S.F. Letter
also stated that the original proposal was to create two lots;
noted that adjacent neighbor Cheryl Grudnoske did not sign the
petition and believes the property should be developed into two
lots; noted that U.S.F.W.S. is willing to consider a change to
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, May 14, 1984
Page Two
the three-lot concept only if all neighbors concur. (letter was
given to Council)
Grudnoske asked if the
one sewer connection.
for sewer was prior to
the assessment.
Bona property was assessed for more than
Christoffersen reported that the assessment
his time; records can be checked to verify
Attorney Bell noted that the questions posed by Mrs. Grudnoske
are not applicable to the application tonight; request is for a
land split from the Bussard property.
Miller said that by his "scaled calculations" it appears the
acquisition of 9000 to 10,000 S.F. by Bona would provide the
needed depth for an additional building lot.
Bell referred Council to a contract that Mr. Bona has with U.S.F.W.S.
which was dated and accepted a year after the copy of the letter
Grudnoske referred to Council.
.
After discussion, Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that
Council approve the split of the 700'f x 20'f strip from the
Bussard property as per Warranty Deed presented.
In discussion, Mulcahy said he feels Mrs. Grudnoske's concerns
afe well-founded; letter was written about a year before contract
between Bona and U.S.F.W.S., suggested to Mrs. Grudnoske and
her neighbors that Council has not approved three lots, no
variances are requested; noted that the consolidation of the
acquired parcel and the split of the existing lot will have to
occur first; feels that Mrs. Grudnoske's concerns will be
adequately protected.
In further discussion, Miller was ~sked the size of typical lots
in this area. Miller referred Council to a section map; noted
that the lots tend to vary in width and depth:
To the north 4 in
To the south - 1 at
1 at
1 at
2 at
a row at 100' width
118.7' width
90 'width
180 'wi dth
100 . width etc.
Hicks explained that he feels 10,000 S.F. is an adequate acquisition
for the creation of an additional building lot; 14,000 S.F.
does not appear to be needed.
Christiansen referred to letter; noted that the proposal to the
neighborhood was for a two lot concept (original lot plus one
additional lot); exchange should reflect the two lot concept.
Woodburn explained that Council is obligated to uphold the
ordinances; said he has no intention of granting a permanent
variance relative to the lot split.
Motion carried (Rauenhorst, Mulcahy, Woodburn voting in favor of .
the motion; Hicks and Christiansen voting in opposition). (3-2)
Case No. 84-9 Minor Subdivision
Danie Ashbach, 1567 Oak Avenue
Miller described the proposed minor subdivision to be a two-phase
"private urban renewal project" and referred Council to a trans-
parency of the proposed split of a 50' x 470' lot into three
parcels, two of which will be consolidated to the rear of adjacent
lots; the third to contain an existing house which applicant
proposes to rent for 3-5 years and then remove the house and
split the lot, consolidating it with the two adjacent properties.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, May 14, 1984
Page Three
.
Miller noted that the lot created will be substandard (11,000 S.F.);
noted that no additional building sites are being created; no
inaease in density will occur and there will be no change in the
appearance of the property; noted that if the house were removed,
and the lot not subsequently consolidated with an adjacent lot,
a house could be built on the lot, within the required setback.
In discussion, Hicks queried the possibility of consolidating this
lot now; this would eliminate the substandard lot, which he feels
is preferable to the 11,000 S.F. lot. Miller noted that this would
put two structures on one lot, which is also non-conforming;
noted that a bond was suggested, but it didn't seem logical or
workable. Miller noted that the City cannot demand that limits be
placed on the lot, but City could accept the limits, if proposed
by the applicant.
Mulcahy asked if the applicant has agreements for the two consol-
idations. Ashbach said he does.
Hicks moved, seconded by Christiansen, that Council approve the
minor subdivision as outlined (Case No. 84-9). Motion carried
unanimously. (5-0)
Case No. 84-12, Minor Subdivision
Ruth Dic erson-Kre~s, 1676 Chatham Avenue
Mtller explained that the two lots are owned by the applicant;
explained that a lot line adjustment is requested which will make
the rear lot line width of the two lots about equal; explained
that because of the terraced grading, the easterly lot has a very
small usable rear yard; noted that Lot 6 is currently vacant.
Miller explained that the proposed adjustment will reduce the
westerly lot to about 77' at the building line (currently is
about 80'); noted that the Chatham' PUD permits lots below 11,000 S.F.
and lot widths of 75'; proposal will increase Lot 9 to 13,700 S.F.
and reduce Lot 6 to 11,098 S.F.; buildinq envelope of Lot 6 will
exceed that of many of the lots in the subdivision.
Mr. Kreps explained that Lot 6 is the lowest lot; others terrace
down to Lot 6. Kreps said they want a bigger back yard for
Lot 9.
.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Mulcahy that Council approve the
minor subdivision as requested. Motipn carried unanimously. (5-0)
Case No. 84-10, Front Setback Variance for an enclosed 12' x 10'
entrance addition.
Miller explained that a variance from the prevailing 50' front
setback is requested; noted that basically the homes are at about
50' setback; reported that the Board of Appeals recommends
approval of the variance; reported that the Planning Commission
concluded that it was difficult to identify a prevailing setback;
recommends that the prevailing setback does not apply; therefore,
a variance is not needed.
Hicks reported that the Planning Commission wrestled with finding
a hardship on which to base approval of the variance; feels the
Commission would have recommended approval of the variance.
Vander Wyst and Miller concurred that the Vander Wyst house is
very close to the 50' setback. Miller noted that the proposed
addition will not encroach on the required 40' front setback.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council concurs with
the Planning Commission that a variance is not needed; a
prevailing setback has not been defined. Motion carried unanimously.
(5-0)
(variance fee to be refunded).
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, May 14, 1984
Page Four
Case No. 84-11, Arden Hills High T~ch Office Park
Miller referred Council to a transparency of the c-shaped building
and proposed site plan; noted that the service area is to the north,
and that the parking proposed will meet the parking code for a 50%
office/50% warehouse split. Miller reported that no variances are
required for the development as proposed.
Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends approval
of the development with contingencies; explained that the commission
h~ concerns relative to adequacy of parking, which is also a
concern of the developer; noted that the City's concern is that
parking does not adversely impact on the parking of others in the .
area.
Tim Nelson introduced Planner John Shard10w (Howard Dahlgren
Associates), James Theusch (Fowler Hanley Inc.) and Attorney Fred
Richards. Nelson explained that the proposed development is
high quality, feels this corporate image facility is suitable
for this site.
,Jim Theusch referred the Council to colored renderings of the
proposed building, indicated that service traffic will enter on
the east drive, park at the north of the building at 450 angle
~o building and exit the site at the west onto Red Fox Road;
noted the location of enclosed trash receptacles in the rear
corners of the site, which will be enclosed with material
matching the building exterior; noted that the red aluminum panels,
above the recessed window areas will serve as contrast as well
as background for signage.
A landscape plan was shown, indicating berming and over-story
trees along Red Fox Road, perimeter landscaping on west, east
and south, and a focal area at the recessed portion of the
building; exterior lighting was no~ed at 60' on center intervals
around the perimeter, with smaller lighting fixtures in the
building recess area. Theusch reported that the drainage plan
h~ been submitted for City Engineer and RCWD approval. .
In discussion, Hicks asked the kind of turn-over experienced in
these multi-tenant buildings.' Nelson said they propose 3 to 10
year range leases; an average of 5 years is anticipated. Nelson
said they will submit to administrative review, if required, but
would prefer posting the streets and including the parking
regulations in their lease agreement.'
Miller noted that a reserve area for on-site parking, to be built
if needed, would be desirable but the proposed site coverage does
not allow for this.
Miller noted that in his experience, smaller buildings tend to over-
load parking very quickly; the larger the building; the more
flexibility.
Mulcahy asked why the City ordinance does not cover this particular
parking need requirement. Miller explained that we are experiencing .
a different type of use - high tech/service is not truly office/
warehouse; noted that the ordinance parking requirements are based
on projections of employees for given uses and/or gross floor
space.
Anticipated development of the balance of Reiling property, north
of Red Fox, Miller anticipates will probably be similar to this
development. Miller noted that it is a very visible area of
Arden Hills; from a planning standpoint feels development of tracts
of this size are all right.
Hicks moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council approves issuance
of a Building Permit for the Arden Hills High Tech Office Park as
presented with Case No. 84-11 (Site Plan dated 4-23-84, with
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, May 14, 1984
Page Five
.
landscaping as amended), subject to:
1. Administrative review of parking needs of tenant(s)
prior to issuance of building permit(s) for interior
finishing of tenant's space within the building.
2. Approval of drainage plan by City Engineer and RCWD.
3. Resolution of park dedication prior to issuance of
occupancy permit.
Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
Case No. 84-14, Sideyard Setback Variance and Lot Splits and
Consolidation, Hohn and Laska, 1113 Amble Drive and 4408 Amble
Circle
Council was referred to a transparency of the three subject lots,
indicating the splits and consolidations proposed in order to
correct the two foot substandard setback of the house on lot 3,
which was not found until the house was substantially complete.
Miller reported that the Board of Appeals recommends approval of
the proposal as presented; reported that the Planning Commission
also recommends approval of the proposal, with the adjustment of
t~e lot line on lot 1 as recommended in the Planning memo (4-26-84).
Mr. Hohn explained his plans for the rear yard of his home on lot
2, which have been disrupted because of the encroachment of the
house on lot 3.
Mr. Laska reported that strings have been placed along the pro-
posed adjusted lot line between lots 2 and 3, and along the
"recommended" adjusted line between lot 1 and lot 3 (Planning
memo); noted that the "recommended" line looks the best.
Hicks moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that Council approve the
8' sideyard setback on Lot 3, Block 1, Karth Lake Hills, adjusting
the lot line between Lots 2 and 3 as proposed (Case No. 84-14)
and adjusting the lot line between Lot 1 and 3 as recommended in
Planning memo (4-26-84). Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
Zoning Ordinance Interpretation - Sports Injury Clinic, Arden
Hills Club
Council was referred to memo from Zoning Administrator Dorothy
Zehm, requesting Council's interpretation of the Zoning
Ordinance as it relates to a proposed sports clinic in the Arden
Hills Club (5-9-84).
Dr. Raymond Hendrickson explained that 98% of patients are Club
members; noted that he has been operating the sports clinic in the
Club for about a year; noted that it is about a half-time job now;
wants to work it into a full-time jOb and open the clinic to non-
members of the Club.
.
In discussion, it was queried why the ordinance does not permit
medical offices in industrial districts. Miller explained that
personal services and clinics have historically been considered
to have more retail orientation than normal offices, creating
more retail intensity, and requiring more parking, Miller
suggested that who Dr. Hendrickson is serving is probably the
deciding factor as to whether or not the proposed clinic is
ancillary to the Club's operation; suggested it could conceivably
be considered ancillary if for private membership; if open to
anyone, a separate use, and not accessory.
In discussion, Miller noted that the existing liquor lounge and
sports shop, within the Club, are open to the public; noted that
"restaurants" are permitted in industrial districts with a Special
Use Permit, retail sales are not.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, May 14, 1984
Page Six
It was noted that the lounge is advertised, the pro-shop is not.
In a poll of the Council, the following interpretations of the
sport clinic proposal were:
- Rauenhorst, Hicks and Woodburn - not accessory to the
sport club use, as proposed
- Mulcahy - accessory to the sport club
- Christiansen - an accessory use other than normal
Jim Bourquin, President of Arden Hills Club, Inc., explained that ...
the clinic is compatible with the Club's operation; reported that
Dr. Hendrickson has built a considerable clientel from the Club
membership; suggested that there is a growing need for this ser-
vice from members of the club; noted that Dr. Hendrickson would
like to open the clinic to non-members as well; explained that
the Club would like to provide additional space to accomodate
the clinic, but wants to know that it is permissable first.
Bourquin said the bulk of his work is with our members.
It was explained to Mr. Bourquin and Dr. Hendrickson, that the
decision as to whether or not the proposed clinic is accessory to
the sports club will be made by the City Zoning Administrator.
It was also explained that City Code provides for appeal of that
decision, if the applicant feels the decision is in error.
REPORT OF PARK DIRECTOR JOHN BUCKLEY
Bid Award - Tennis and Basketball Courts and Fencing
Council was referred to Buckley's memo of 5-4-84, and attached
list of 10 bids received, Buckley reported that the bids are
over the estimated $42,500; recommended the deletion of the four
alternates listed in his memo; noted that if the four alternates
are deleted, T.A. Schifsky and Son is the low bidder at $57,196.
Parks Committee Chairman Dave Sand reported that the Parks
Committee, in July of 1983, studied the needs and desires for the
various City parks, and recommended a ten-year plan to Council
which is to be reviewed each year by the Committee to ensure that
the plan continue to reflect Village needs.
Sand reported that the Committee concurs with Buckley's
recommendations; as listed in his memo; reported that the Committee
strongly recommended four tennis courts last year as part of the
development plan, representing the community's desires and needs
and is in favor of construction of the tennis courts as planned.
Miller reported that his cost estimates were prepared utilizing
late 1982 bids for 1983 construction; noted that the bids received
reflect an 18% increase in construction costs over last year.
Miller said he feels the bids received are right on target for
this year.
In discussion of recommendation No.3 re a change order to eliminate
the concrete maintenance strip and deduct of $4,000 from the '
contract, concern was expressed that all bidders be treated fairly.
Miller explained that the bid award must be made on the base bid
less the alternates; after a contract is signed, noted that the
City can then ask for a change order.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council award the bid to
T.A. Schifsky and Sons in the amount of $57,196, with the four
Alternate Deducts. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
Park Department Truck Purchase
Council ~as referred to Buckley's memo of May 3, 1984 re Pickup
Truck Purchase, and to Johansen's memo of May 10th re Purchase
of 4x4 Pickup.
...
, .
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, May 14, 1984
Page Seven
.
Buckley explained that he is recommending the purchase of a 4x4
instead of the budgeted pickup because the frame and body are
stronger, and he feels it will be safer for pulling the transport
trailer carrying the heavy mowers; 4x4 can also serve as a back
up for Public Works in case of equipment breakdown and can be
utilized for snow removal from the ice rinks.
Buckley referred Council to the three quotes received; recommended
the GMC because of the 8 cylinder engine and automatic transmission.
Christiansen moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that Council authorize
the purchase of a 3/4 ton 4x4 GMC truck at a cost of $9,990.
In further discussion, Buckley was asked why he budgeted for a
pickup and is now requesting a 4x4. Buckley said he was trying
to keep the Village, as well as Park Department, costs down;
advised that basically the parks department can get by with a
pickup, but he feels, in the long run, the City will save money
with 3/4 ton 4x4, which is more versatile, and will not be over-
worked.
'.
Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
(financing of the 4x4 truck was referred to the Finance Committee
for its recommendations to Council.)
Summer Program and Maintenance Personnel
Council was referred to Buckley's memo of 5-8-84 re 1984 Summer
Maintenance Personnel and 1984 Summer Program Personnel. Buckley
explained that the proposed salaries are within the budget.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council approve the
1984 Summer Program and Maintenance Personnel as outlined in memo.
Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)'
Needs Assessment re Additional Water Tower - Norman Hendrickson
absent
C ristoffersen referred Council to charts taken last year on
August 1st, July 11th, July 4th and August 8th indicating the
levels of water in the Arden Hills tower; noted that the pressure
reading charts indicate sufficient pressure for domestic use but
insufficient pressure to fight fires.
Christoffersen explained that the original analysis was done in
1967; noted that a re-analysis of the system will be made in order
to determine the needed tower size. Christoffersen explained that
the ultimate population was estimated at 14,000 i~ 1967; noted that
we are down some in population, fire rates have changed in the
interim; the arsenal was not involved in the previous analysis,
land usage has changed etc. Christoffersen explained that an
additional tank, of a size to be determined, is needed; noted
that municipalities must meet standards for fire protection ex-
plained that he does not have specific details to answer questions
tonight; noted that previous projections were for a 1~ million
gallon tank; noted that a tower is needed in the lower system;
noted we now experience a 30 1b dror in pressure when the pump
goes on; noted that Arden Hills is now hooked to the Rosevi11e
system to give us the needed pressure; reported that the fire
chief recommends 3000 gpm for fire usage, which seems high; was
advised that each pumper pumps 1200 gpm.
Rauenhorst suggested that the needs assessment for an additional
tower be re-schedu1ed to a meeting when Engineer Hendrickson can
be present. Christoffersen explained that Arden Hills needs
another tower in order to keep the pressure up and put water in
storage for the City's needs; noted that the size has not been
determined; explained that a tower will be needed whether or not
the City sells water to the arsenal.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, May 14, 1984
Page Eight
Arsenal Request re Estimated Cost to Furnish Municipal Water to
Site
CciUilcil was referred to several tabl es, prepared by Mayor Woodburn,
indicating projected costs to Arden Hills if a water tower is
built and the arsenal does not buy water; if arsenal contributes
to capital cost of tower and does not pay a surcharge on water bill;
what happens if the arsenal would pay nothing toward the cost of
the tower and instead pay a factor times the general Village rate.
Woodburn reported that the arsenal engineers have requested a rough
cost estimate to provide them with City water; noted they know the
costs of their other options. Christoffersen explained that
specifics are not needed; they are looking for a rough estimate of .
costs.
Mulcahy expressed concerns re adequacy of water supply and cost of
water from Roseville, length of contract with arsenal, whether the
charges we establish will be adequate over a long period of time,
etc.
Rauenhorst expressed concern relative to Arden Hills' contract with
Roseville; queried whether Roseville is committed to sell water to
Arden Hills for us to sell to the arsenal at a profit.
M~lcahy expressed his desire for a detailed proposal before ~ouncil;
f~els he does not have enough data to make a decision.
Woodburn explained that the question at this time is should we sell
water to the arsenal under some circumstances, or not under any
circumstances?
Hicks - Yes
Rauenhorst - No
Christiansen - If we need a tower anyway, then it is
reasonable to sell water to the arsenal
to share the City's costs
Mulcahy - No
Woodburn - Yes, feels we can take a high figure which
will reduce cost of water and tower for our
citizens
Hicks moved, seconded by Christiansen that Council propose 33%
arsenal share for tower expense and a water rate factor of 1
(Chart I, Column 3). .
In discussion, Christiansen suggested some increase in rate also.
Hicks moved to amend his motion to change the arsenal's share of
facilities expense to 33% and the surcharge for water to 1.2.
Motion carried (Hicks, Christiansen, Woodburn voting in favor of
the motion; Rauenhorst and Mulcahy voting in opposition. (3-2)
(Christoffersen to prepare letter)
(Rauenhorst left the meeting at 11:50 p.m.)
.
Cable Communication Advisory Committee Recommendations
(Deferred to another meeting when chairman 8aueris present).
Finance Committee Appointment
Woodburn appointed Scott deLambert as a member of the Finance
Committee for the balance of 1984.
Christiansen moved, seconded by Hicks, to ratify the Mayor's
appointment. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0)
REPORT OF VILLAGE TREASURER DONALD LAMB
Investment
5-4-84 - $125,000 at Twin City Federal @ 11.35% interest; to
mature 5-3-85
... .. .
.
.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, May 14, 19B4
Page Nine
Hicks moved, seconded by Christiansen that Council ratify the
Treasurer's investment. (4-0)
Petition for Speed Reductionh Hamline Avenue,
Council concurred to refer t e request to the
for its recommendations to Council.
South of STH 96
Public Safety Committee
OTHER BUSINESS
Presbyterian Homes Publication on Johanna Middl~ School Plans
Mulcahy suggested that Council send its congratulations to
Presbyterian Homes on their expansion program. Council concurred.
Crime Prevention Area Signs
Council concurred with the installation of the proposed Crime
Prevention Area signs as requested.
REPORT OF VILLAGE CLERK ADMINISTRATOR CHARLOTTE McNIESH
Claims and Payrolls
Christiansen moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council approve the
Claims and Payrolls as presented. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0)
Adjournment
Hicks moved, seconded by Christiansen, that the meeting adjourn
af 12:16 a.m. Motion carried unanimously. (4-0)
CZIa~C?l~
Charlotte McNiesh
Clerk Administrator
t;(~~d-.
obert L. Woodburn
~, ayb r
-
Notice of Meeting:
The next Regular Council Meeting will be held on Tuesday May 29th
at 7:30 p.m. at the Village Hall.