HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 04-09-1984
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Village of Arden Hills
Monday, April 9, 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 Councilmembers Dale Hicks,
Kathleen Rauenhorst, Michael Christiansen, Thomas
Mulcahy 7:45 p.m.
Absent - None
Also Present - Treasurer Donald Lamb, Planner Orlyn Miller,
Clerk Administrator Charlotte McNiesh, Deputy
Clerk Dorothy Zehm
Approval of Minutes
Hicks moved, seconded by Christiansen, that the Minutes of the
Council Meetings of March 26th and March 27th be approved as
submitted.
Business from the Floor
None
REPORT OF VILLAGE PLANNER ORLYN MILLER
Case No. 83-27, Lametti Addition
Final Plat
Council was referred to transparency of the Final Plat of
Lametti Addition (Revised 3-6-84), Planning memo (3-27-84)
and to Minutes of Planning Commission Meeting (4-4-84).
Miller noted the contingencies of approval of the Preliminary
Plat:
1. Engineer's approval of streets, utilities, grading
and drainage plans.
2. Resolution of Park Dedication.
3. Approval of restrictive covenants by the City Council.
4. Relocation of Lametti Circle 5' - 6' to the north.
.
5. IS' sideyard setback from the south property lines
of lots 3 and 4, Block 2 (a covenant restriction
on these lots.)
Miller reported that the approval of streets and utilities
will occur when improvements are designed, and before plat is
recorded; park dedication will be negotiated by Council before
plat is recorded; revised draft of restrictive covenants have
been approved by Council; relocation of Lametti Circle appears
on the revised plat (3-6-84); covenant restrictions, on Lots
3 a~d 4, Block 2, have not been established.
Miller recommended approval of the Final Plat contingent upon
the filing of the restrictive covenants on Lots 3 and 4,
Block 2.
Jon Hoganson, Attorney representing Catherine Lametti, reported
that he discussed the recording of the IS' setback restriction
with City Attorney Lynden; reported that Lynden agrees that
the restriction could simply be noted on the Building Permit,
and recorded with the Building Inspector.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, Apri 1 9, 1984
Page Two
In discussion, concerns expressed by Council, if not a
recorded restriction, were:
1. Restriction could get lost.
2. Potential land owners may not be aware of the
restriction when purchasing these lots.
3. Future construction may be desired, after initial
Building Permit is issued (deck, room addition etc.);
restriction, if on original Building Permit may not
be carried over to subsequent permits.
Hoganson explained that his concern is that the restriction,
if recorded in covenants, may result as a "cloud on the title"
at some time in the future.
.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council approve the
Final Plat of Lametti Addition, subject to the filing of
restrictive covenants on Lots 3 and 4 of Block 2 establishing
15 foot sideyard setbacks at the south lot lines, and
resolution of the park dedication. Motion carried unanimously.
(4-0)
Petition for Village to Install Streets and Utilities,
Resolution No. 84-12, Orderinq Feasibility Report for Impr.
No. 84-2
McNiesh reported that she has the Petition signed by Catherine
Lametti, requesting the City to install the streets and utilities,
and a letter stating that developer will reimburse the City
for the cost of preparation of the feasibility report if
improvement is aborted.
Hicks moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that Council adopt
Resolution No. 84-2, ORDERING FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR IMPROVE-
MENT NO. 84-2.
(Mulcahy arrived at Meeting)
Motion carried (Hicks, Rauenhorst, Christiansen, Woodburn
voting in favor; Mulcahy abstained). (4-0-1)
Park Dedication
William Muske reported that he has discussed park dedication
with Councilman Mulcahy; noted that he would like to resolve
the park dedication requirement as soon as possible, in order
to know their costs.
Mulcahy suggested that Council wait until the value of the
property can be determined; is reluctant to accept the
Assessor's market value, without further expert opinion that
this is an adequate base on which to determine park dedication.
Muske reported that in 1982 the assessed land value was
$84,000; in 1983 the assessed land value was increased to .
$257,400, including the lot on which Mrs. Lametti's house is
located (Lot 5, Block 2). Muske ~oted that the land has not
been sold; is being developed by Mrs. Lametti; consequently,
no appraisal has been made; feels the matter can readily be
negotiated on a reasonable basis. Muske advised that the
house is assessed at $36,000; house and land at $293,400.
After discussion, Mulcahy moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that
Council select an appraiser to determine the "undeveloped
land value" of the Lametti plat; appraisal costs to be paid
by the developer. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
(Appraisal to include values of land with and without Lot 5,
Block 2).
.
.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, April 9, 1984
Page Three
Case No. 84-7, Aggregate Sideyard Setback Variance, 3475 Siems Court
Council was referred to a transparency of the Nelson lot and pro-
posed house location; Planning Report (3-26-84) Board of Appeals
report (3-29-84) and Planning Commission Minutes (4-4-84).
Miller noted that an aggregate 25' sideyard setback is required in
the R-1 District; 20' is proposed, 10' on each side. Miller noted
that the facts to consider are:
1. The width of the lot (85' at the setback line) which is
10' below the R-1 District minimum.
2. The size of the proposed house relative to the lot and
typical houses in the neighborhood.
3. The effect of the topography of the lot upon the siting
of the garage portion of the house.
4. The impact upon adjacent properties.
Miller noted that the 10' setback does not negatively impact on
either of the adjacent properties; noted that a 28' wide garage is
proposed which encroaches on the openness of the lot; noted that
in ~he R-2 District~with a minimum lot width of 85', the aggregate
sideyard setback is 15'.
Nelson referred Council to a letter from Mrs. Opsahl, neighbor to
south, stating that she has no objection to the setbacks proposed.
Nelson noted that the garage off-set is needed to save at least
one large oak tree, north of the gara~e, and to provide the
necessary width for the lower garage (lake side) to accommodate an
8' door and service door. Nelson said he prefers a 28' garage,
but can live with 26' width if this is necessary.
Hicks moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that Council approve a 3'
aggregate setback variance for Case No. 84-7.
In further discussion, Mulcahy noted that the Board of Appeals
and Planning Commission recommend the variance as requested (5'
aggregate); asked if two feet really solved the site problems;
noted that the applicant has shown regard for the trees; asked
applicant if a 3' variance will allow sufficient room to accommodate
an access door in the lower level garage. Nelson said the service
door would have to be eliminated.
Hicks noted that the intent of the motion was not to restrict the
use of the lower garage; noted that an alternative is to move the
garage to the north 2'.
Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
Case No. 84-8, Front and Sideyard Setback Varances, 3550 Dellwood
Avenue
Council was referred to transparency of lot and proposed house
location, Planning Memo (3-26-84), Board of Appeals report (3-29-84)
and Planning Commission Minutes (4-4-84).
Miller explained that the lot is a lot of record, a major portion
of which is pond area; explained that the applicant proposes to
build on the existing narrow ledge of land west of the pond,
requiring a 23' front setback variance, and a 3' sideyard variance,
for a proposed deck, from the north property line.
Miller indicated the location of an easement which was established
some time ago to allow filling of a portion of this lot; noted that
the filling was not done. Miller explained that the house as drawn
encroaches on the easement; applicant has indicated he will change
the dimensions of the house to eliminate the encroachment.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, April 9, 1984
Page Four
Miller noted that the 17' setback allows sufficient space on the
driveway to park a car, without encroaching on the street r.o.w.;
noted the lot is a hardship; house has been designed to fit the
buildable portion of the lot; reported that the Board of Appeals
and Planning Commission recommend approval.
Mr. Jessup reported that he and his wife have discussed the pro-
posed house with three neighbors (Osterbauer, 1211 Tiller Lane;
Arend, 1227 Tiller Lane and Matteson, 1249 Tiller); submitted a
memo, signed by these residents, that they are aware of the plans
and the front setback variance of 23' for the house and north
sideyard variance of 3' for a deck, and do not object to the plans.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council approve the 23'
front setback variance, and the 3' north sideyard setback variance
for a deck. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
In further discussion, it was noted that the irregular easement
line could probably be modified to accommodate the house as drawn.
Miller explained that the easement was created to protect the pond;
applicant has indicated that he will change the house and accept
the easement as it is, rather than pursue the legal work to change
it. Miller noted that the easement modification, or house modifi-
cation, does not affect the variance.
.
Dick Erickson, designer and probable builder of the house, suggested
that the City include in its motion that the City is amenable to
some flexibility of the easement line, as approved by RCWD, in the
event Jessup decides to pursue a modification of the easement line.
Hicks moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council will grant an
easement line change, as approved by RCWD, should the applicant
elect to apply for an easement line ~hange. Motion carried
unanimously. (5-0)
Case No. 83-13, McClung Third Addition
Preliminary Plat
Miller explained that the hearing was held on June I, 1983,
and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission,
with contingencies, one of which was approval of the Preliminary
Plat of Royal Hills North.
Miller explained that Council tabled its motion to approve the
Preliminary Plat (12-12-83) pending resolution of the plat
to the north (Royal Hills North); noted that Council approved
the Royal Hills North Preliminary Plat on 3-26-84.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Hicks, to place the motion on
the table. Motion carried (Rauenhorst, Hicks, Mulcahy,
Woodburn voting in favor; Christiansen voting in opposition.
(4-1) .
Hicks moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that Council approve the
Preliminary Plat of McClung Third Addition, subject to: ~
1. Approval of location and width of drainage easements
and grading by the City Engineer.
2. Provision of an inside r.o.w. radius of at least
25 feet at the turn in Arden Vista Drive.
3. Re-naming of Arden Vista Drive to Arden Vista Circle
or Court.
4. Resolution of Park Dedication.
Motion carried (Hicks, Rauenhorst, Mulcahy, Woodburn voting
in favor; Christiansen voting in opposition. (4-1)
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, Aprn 9, 1984
Page Five
.
Petition for Village to Install Streets and Utilities,
Resolution No. 84-13, Ordering Feasibility Report for Impr.
No. 84-3
McNiesh reported that she has the Petition requesting that
the City install the streets and utilities; reported that Mr.
McClung is out of town and she does not, as yet, have a letter
stating that he will reimburse the City for the feasibnity
report if improvement is aborted.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council adopt
Resolution No. 84-13, ORDERING FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR IMPR.
84-3. Motion carried (Rauenhorst, Hicks, Mulcahy, Woodburn
voting in favor; Christiansen in opposition). (4-1)
Case No. 84-4, Site Plan Review, Scholls. Inc. Expansion of
Office/Warehouse, 4440 Round Lake Road West
Council was referred to transparency of revised site plan. in-
corporating an on-site truck turning area which was recommended
by the Planning Commission. Miller noted that a S' setback
variance was approved ~reviously at the north line for the expanded
warehouse (lS' setback).
Miller reported that the on-site turning area provides radii and
dis~ance which should adequately accommodate truck turning move-
ments; noted that it causes a loss of parking spaces .(from SO to
43). Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends
approval of the revised site plan, contingent upon administrative
approval of exterior lighting and landscape plans, and a revised
site plan showing a deferred parking. area at the southwest of the
site to accommodate 2S+ spaces for future construction, if needed.
Miller said the additional parking will not exceed maximum site
coverage requirement.
.
Applicant Harold Schroeder was present, and submitted a revision
of the site plan incorporating the deferred parking area requested
by the Planning Commission; explained that the exterior lighting
plan and landscape plan will be prepared and submitted for approval.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Mulcahy, that Council approve the
revised site plans for the Scholls, Inc. office/warehouse expansion
(4-9-84). Motion carried unanimously. (S-O), ;
Stock ilin of Black Dirt -Red Fox Road
Council was referred to ehm s memo -3-84. pp ieant L oy
Riebe was present and gave Council a letter from George Reiling
giving the applicants, Lloyd Beyer and Lloyd Riebe, permission to
stockpile topsoil on his property on the north side of Red Fox
Road.
Riebe explained that they propose to stockpile the black dirt in
the same location class S had been stockpiled and removed, about
half way between the Emerald Inn and the new office/warehouse;
plans to stockpile for about 2 years; explained that the dirt will
be used for lawns. Riebe explained that the pile would be S'-6'
high and will be hauled in S-yard and la-yard trucks, beginning
about August 1984. Riebe said that they do not intend to pulverize
at this time; possibility of pulverizing later; said no signs are
proposed.
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council grant the
temporary stockpiling of black dirt on the Reiling property (north
side of Red Fox Road; pile to not exceed 6' in height and to be
removed by September 18, 1985 at which time site shall be restored;
Red Rox Road shall be kept clean during hauling operations; stock-
pile shall not be over the north/south water and sewer easement.
Motion carried unanimously. (S-O)
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, April 9, 1984
Page Six
Proposal of Police Chief John Kellev re Contracting for Police
Services with New 8righton
Council was referred to letter proposal for contract police services
between Arden Hills and New 8ri9hton prepared by the New Brighton
Police and Finance Departments (4-5-84).
New Brighton Chief of Police John C. Kelley and Finance Director
Margaret Eagan were present to answer questions relative to the
proposal which was presented by Kelley.
Kelley described the proposed service to be full law enforcement,
to include patrol, investigations, traffic enforcement and crime .
prevention at a cost savings to Arden Hills, over a two-year
period, of about $100,000.
Patrol service would be by 6 officers, instead of the current 5\,
and will provide 24 hour coverage dedicated to Arden Hills, supple-
mented by reserve officer patrol and explorer post activities.
Kelley explained that response time will be faster; strong emphasis
is placed on residential patrol and crime watch program; officers
are on a 6 days on 3 days off schedule.
Kelley explained that the crime prevention services would include
Operation Identification, Operation Childprint, Neighborhood Watch
Program, and the Police Reserves sponsor a Law Enforcement Explorer
Post which already has several Arden Hills youth as members.
Kelley referred Council to a comparison of Crime Clearance Rates,
1980 thru 1983, showing the percentp~~crime rate clearance in
New Brighton, Arden Hills and the ~~:~-wide average; comparison
indicated a low percentage of crime clearance for Arden Hills.
Kelley advised that all investigations are performed by uniformed
and plain clothes personnel; recruitment of personnel since 1983
is by MPRS police recruitment systems, which includes physical
agility tests and psychological tests. Kelley said this does not
preclude hiring from other sources, but he is reluctant to bringing
people in laterally. Kelley explained that Arden Hills will get
a mix of seasoned and entry level personnel.
Cost projections were reviewed by Kelley, compared with Arden Hills'
current service. Kelley noted that the 32~/mile (instead of current
35~/mile) is obtained by the conversion of patrol cars to propane.
In discussion, Kelley was asked why New Brighton wants to provide
Arden Hills with law enforcement services. Kelley explained that
it will enable New Brighton to spread its overhead costs, and New
Brighton, as well as Arden Hills will save money. Kelley noted
that the cost projections are estimates; noted that both New
Brighton and Arden Hills are dealing with the same people, and
have about the same population base.
Kelley said he does not foresee the need for an increase in
support personnel; feels his staff can absorb the additional
clerical.
.
Kelley said that "Arden Hills" can ve~y visibly appear on the
patrol cars as well as "New Brighton".
Kelley explained that Crime Watch is handled by the police force;
Operation Identification is handled by CSO in conjunction with the
police Crime Watch program.
.
.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, April 9, 1984
Page Seven
The advantages to Arden Hills, described by Kelley, were:
- better police service
- a safer community
- people will feel safer ~ith more visibility of patrol cars
- s{rong emphasis on Crime Watch will make citizens feel and
be safer ----
The time frame needed to include Arden Hills was estimated to be
90 days. Kelley explained that he would work with the County to
resolve things which are in process at the time of contract. change;
noted that certain functions are county-wide and keep on going
outside of the City lines.
It was noted that cost projections under Ramsey County show an increase
of 6~%; and considerably lower under New Brighton. Kelley said i~direct
personnel costs would be about $10,000 less the second year.
A question was raised on how much the budget would increase if
New Brighton were to absorb Ramsey County officers. Kelley said he is
reluctant to bring people in laterally; noted that Union Contracts may
enter in.
There were no comments from the floor relative to the proposal.
Council took the proposal under advisement and thanked Kelley and
Eagan for the presentation.
Bid Award - 1984 Diseased Tree and Stumt Removal Contract
Council was referred to Buckley's memo 4-5-84).
Hicks moved, seconded by Rauenhorst,'that Council award the bid for
1984 Diseased Tree and Stump Removal to the low bidder Bluemel
Tree Service, Hudson, Wisconsin. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
REPORT OF VILLAGE TREASURER DONALD LAMB
Investment
3-28-84 - invested $200,000 at First Federal at 10.60% interest for
6 months, to mature 9-26-84.
Christiansen moved to ratify the Treasurer's investment. Motion
was seconded by Hicks and carried unanimously. (5-0)
Resignation of Finance Committee Member
Christiansen moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council accept with
regrets Mark Sullivan's resignation from the Arden Hills Finance
Committee. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
A roval to Attend MRPA Institute for Professional
Council was referre to Buckley's memo an attache
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Christiansen, that Council authorize
Buckley's attendance at the MRPA Institute for Professional Develop-
ment on May 2nd and 3rd at Camp Courage at a cost of $60.00.
McNiesh noted that the expenditure is within the budget.
Motion carried (Rauenhorst, Christiansen, Mulcahy, Woodburn voting
in favor; Hicks voting in opposition). (4-1)
(Hicks does not think the program, in general, pertains to the
Arden Hills parks program, as described.)
Discussion re Proposed Fire Station
Council was referred to a letter from Shoreview City Manager Gary
Dickson (4-5-84) requesting Council's response by Mid-May to a
detailed fire service analysis consisting of various scenarios,
options and cost comparisons.
" '.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, April 9, 1984
Page Ei9ht
Woodburn reported that he drove the routes, at relatively slow
speeds; there is a minute to 2 minute difference with the present
station being closer to us than the proposed new station; feels
there is no response time decrease for Arden Hills that he can see
from the new station. The biggest advantage Woodburn sees is
possibly of increased recruitment; suggested that by increasing the
existing stations, if they have room, they would probably do as well,
or better, for Arden Hills. Woodburn said his biggest concern is
justifying the on-going costs to our tax payers, which appear to be
about $40,000 extra/year beyond the capital costs when the new fire
station is functioning; feels this $40,000 would give Arden Hills
little extra protection,except the possibility of additional fire .
fighter availability; another concern is whether the site advantage
to Arden Hills is worth 33.7% of the cost.
Hicks noted that option #1 (scenario #2) appears to be the cheapest
long term alternative for Arden Hills, assuming the accuracy of the
projections; noted that the first 10 years costs are high, and
suggested that possibly this out of proportion front-end money doesn't
justify the ultimate lower costs after 1993. Hicks said option 3,
in his opinion, is not a good alternative for Arden Hills; Option
2 looks to be the better one for a period of years, and then it is
more costly.
Christiansen asked why Highway 96 is considered a viable line for
option #2 when Station #2 is also north of Highway 96; seems an
unrealistic line. Christiansen noted that options #2 and #3 are
advantageous to Shoreview; therefore option II looks better to us.
In discussion, it was noted that the situation is unique because
the existing stations have not been paid for by the contracting
cities. It was noted that one alternative suggested by Shoreview
Mayor Wedell is not included in the scenario - Shoreview to pay the
cost of the 3rd station land. Hicks'said, in his estimation, the
land cost is too high.
Rauenhorst said she can see some benefit to Arden Hills, but much more
benefit for Shoreview; noted that Shoreview wants the station one
way or another; feels there is room to negotiate, favors keeping the
system intact.
Some concerns expressed were:
- lack of detailed projections of operational costs of the new
station.
- land and building costs seem expensive.
will the level of service increase by 50%.
- accuracy of option #3 projections.
Council action was deferred to the next Council meeting.
Other Business
.
Rauenhorst suggested that Council
meetings be scheduled relative to
expedite Council meetings.
Hicks reported that the Youth Service Bureau proposed budget for
next year proposes a 15% increase for participating cities; noted
that Roseville and Arden Hills suggested 10% is more realistic.
retreat or discussion non-action
meeting procedures in order to
-'
.
.
Minutes of Regular Council Meeting
Monday, April 9, 1984
Page Nine
REPORT OF VILLAGE CLERK ADMINISTRATOR CHARLOTTE McNIESH
Approval of Peddler Permit - Blue Bell Ice Cream
Rauenhorst moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council approve the
Blue Bell Ice Cream Permit for packaged ice cream vending. Motion
carried unanimously. (5-0)
A roval of Northrid e Emerald Machine License
ic s moved, seconde by r stlansen, t at ounCl approve e
1984 hotel and vending machine licenses for Northridge Emerald Inn.
Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
Claims and Payroll
Hicks moved, seconded by Christiansen that Council approve the Claims
and Payroll as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
Adjournment
Hicks moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that the
12:00 midnight. Motion carried unanimovsly.
meeting adjourn at
(5-0)
~~~
Charlotte McNiesh
Clerk Administrator
~~~~
R oert L. Woodburn
Mayor
Notice of Meeting
The next Council Meeting will be held on Monday, April 23rd at
7:30 p.m. at the Village Hall.