HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 06-19 CC MINUTESCITY OF GEM LADE
MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETIING.
19 JUNE 2006
The June, 2006 regular meeting ofthe City Council ofthe City of Gem Lake was called to order by Mayor Emeott
on Monday, 19 June2006 at7:.08.PM in the first floor meeting room.ofTousley Ford. MayorEmeott, Councilors Bosak,
Rasmussen; Schilling and Watson. Also present were City Clerk Magnuson, City Attorney Newcome, City Engineer
Higgins, City Planner Nolan, Special Counsel Ingram, Jim: Lindner and Craig Rafferty ofthe Planning Commission,
Mark Sweet•of the Business Development Committee. Others in attendance included: Roger Anderson,, Amy Cralarn,
Jim: McNulty, Holly Watson,.Felic.ity Furber, Bryan.Flarjes;.Bryan Harjes, Bruce Shirley; Bill Grifth, BobUzpen, Mary
Bauer, Ann Strommer, Mike Strommer, Gretchen Artig-Swomley, Dale Swomley, Gary TangwalI, .Bryan. Hansen,•Sara
Wyckoff Mayor Eineott thanked those in attendance for corning_
Following Mayor Emeott's request for additions, deletions; or corrections, the following actions were taken: I.)
unanimous. approval of the I 5 May 2006 Minutes ofthe City Council meeting as presented on Motion by Rasmussen,
Second by. Schilling;.2) unannnous.approval of the. 19 June 20.06 Agenda ofthe City Council meeting as. amended (by
•Watsonto include New.Business on Planning Commission:discussion, Hillary Farm discussion, Publication-af. Summary
Ordinance; by Schilling -to include 18 July 2006 workshop; by Special Counsel to table. Public Improvement items A)
and C) per Clerk) on Motion by Bosak, Second by Rasmussen.
The Clerk then presented General. Announcements.
The report of the PIanning Commission and a brief summary by Mr. Lindnerwas acknowledged and acceptedas
receivedin the form of a letterfrom the Chairman to Mayor Emeott, said report having been distributed:electronically
to. the Council in advance.
Staff reports were presented by the. Clerk and included comments: as follows:
1) City WaterPlan. Clerk Magnuson deferred to Mr. Higgins. Engineer Higgins confirmed. that a draft ofthe.
plan is available and SEH would like a meeting to review same. Higgins explained the basis for the plan
and Emeott expanded on the • needs for the plan; including Metropolitan • Council requirements and
Comprehensive Municipal. Plan requirements.
2} Town Hall.Pian. Clerk Magnuson reported a meeting is scheduled for 22 June 2006 at • 10:00 AM. Siting
and space utilization will be discussed to determine space utilization. The White Bear Lake Conservation
District has expressed an interest in renting space from the project for their needs. Mayor Emeott then
briefly explained the project.
3) Scheuneman Road Cul-de-Sac. Clerk Magnuson reportedthat thethe cul-de-sac has not terminated traffic from
entering .Highway 61. Project Engineer Mitchell has proposed threealternatives including a block: wall,
a boulder wall and.placement of boulders, each Casting approxiinately $2,500. MnfDOT has indicated no
guard rail will be placed. Watson asked if we have received a price for aguard rail and the answer was no.
Tabled to next. meeting pending cost of guard rail.
4) Right -Of -Way Maintenance. Clerk Magnuson indicated he.and Mayor Emeott have discussed Maintenance:
requirements of roads •now that we have more than 1.5 miles of city streets. An ordinance needs to be
discussed following research of League of .MN Cities recommendations. Hopefully the project can he
completed by the end of the year.
5) City Limit Signs. Mayor .Emeett reported on the desire. of the .City Council and Planning Commission to
install City Limit Signs at the various entry points to Gem Lake: on LaBore Road, Otter Lake Road, County
Road .E, Hoffman Road and. B.ig Fox•and Little Fax..18" x 24" signs havebeen ordered and will be placed
to assist the public in knowing Where Gem Lake is.
. Mayor Emeott then identified the needa of the City regarding the 2008 required:.update of the Comprehensive
Municipal Plan last updated in 1997. Mark Nolan was.introduced.Mr. Nolan introduced Himself as Senior Urban Planner
for SEH, working throughout ,Minnesota and the Twin Cities. Mr. Nolan presented his credentials as. a landscape
architect and architect. Clerk Magnuson..and Mr. Floeschler have provided over view of Gem Lake and it'.s needs. He
believes we can meet. an early deadline of2007 to complete the work. He provided an overview of the proposal, the
process andthe System Statement ofthe Metropolitan Council, highlighting.several items; He indicatedhow he proposes
to engage citizens in the process..Clerk Magnuson presented the project can be completed for $35,000 per proposal.
Watson asked for clarification of employees statement and Nolan. responded he was referring.to employment in the City.
RESOLVED: Motion by Watson,: Second by•Bosak to approve the SEH proposal. for Comprehensive Municipal Plan
update was: unanimously approved. Mayor Emeott welcomed Mr..Nolan as our Urban Planner. Mr. Higgins credentials
were also discussed.
Page 1 of 17
Clerk Magnuson reported that Ramsey County Elections, in response to the. Help America Vote Act (HAVA); has
asked the City to adopt a resolution authorizing the use of the Automark ballot marking device to. insure HAVA
compliance, and to acknowledge the cost of the systern.acquisition and maintenance as delineated. in the Joint Powers
Agreement by and between Ramsey. County and. Gem Lake, and that the public be informed of the City's intent to use
same. Magnuson explained the difference between the Accavote which tabulates. marked ballots and the Automark which
assists voters in.marking the ballot. Magnuson indicated we will be using a Ramsey County machine and Will be paying
only maintenance and software maintenance. RESOLVED; Motion byBosak, second by Rasmussen to. adoptResolution
No. 2006715 was unanimously approved.
Clerk Magnuson reported that a duly noticed public hearing was convened before the Planning Commission on 05
June 2006 to. receive public comment on a request for a Variance of from .Section. 9.5(1.), Ordinance. No. 43G of 9 feet
from the J.5 foot side yard set back for the R-3 zoning district to 6' to accommodate construction ofa detached garage
that will align with the attached garage already in place. Construction ofthe garage will not provide accessorybuilding
square footage in excess of 1,000 square. feet. The Planning Commission has recommended issuance of the Variance.
RESOLVED: Motion by Bosak, second by Watson to adopt ResoIution No. 2006-18 was unanimously approved.
Clerk Magnuson. then reported thatthe City hasworked for the last several months with architect. Chris Doehrrnan
who represents Bruceand Lorrie Shirley to determine how to best construct a.:home which will include indoor parking
for a 40' motor home. Mr. And Mrs. Shirley have acquired. the.former Thury property at 140.0 Goose. Lake Road. The.
current design would create a rear elevation of approximately 44' or 9' greater than the current ordinance allows.
Architectural cleinents wilt preclude construction of any sheer surfaces of 44' without architectural elements to break
the facade. Working with the Plan Review Committee, the Shirley's have agreed to utilize elements contained in
Ordinance No. 43G and (proposed) Ordinance No. 43 H for building height determination. A duly noticed public hearing
was convened and all present:who wishedto be heard were. heard. The Planning Commission.has recommended approval
ofa Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of the proposed design. Mr: Newcome indicated inclusion ofClerk'.s
comments be incorporated.. RESO LVED: Motion. by Schilling,. second by Watson:to adopt Resoluti on No. 2006-19 was
unanimously. approved.
Mayor Emeott then recognized Mr. Watson who spoke regarding the Planning Commission. Indicating. his
discomfort ataddressing the following issue as Mr. Hoeschler is out of the country, he stated it is important the City of
Gem Lake take on a new direction intheway our Planning Commission works. Based partly on the fact that the Zoning
Ordinance has been under consideration for more than 2 years, he feelsit is important to take on new leadership. Watson
suggested that Mr. Hoeschler beasked to offer his resignation within 60 days and that Mr. Lindner assume:leadership
as interim Chairman ofthe Planning Commission. Mr. Bosak spoke indicating his desire to speak with Mr. Hoeschler
prior to taking the. action to, get his input. Mr. Rasmussen supports starting anew, he feels the Planning Commission
under Mr. 1=-loeschler's leadership have done a greatdeal of work for the community but supports the new start. Mr.
Schilling stated we need to get to more "win/win" situationsand agrees it is time fora change. Mayor Emeott then spoke
that he thanks Mr. Hoeschler for his very concerted efforts and also feels it is time for a. change, indicating atnore people
friendly environment needs to be created willing to negotiate more; especially during the Comprehensive Plan revision
process. Mr. Hansen then addressed the Council and. Mayor.Er:neott then interrupted Mr, .Hansen stating this is not the
time for discussion in an open forum. Mr. Hansen then distributed a hand out to the Council which was not provided. to
Mr. Magnuson as the recording secretary. Mr. Hansen then called for Mayor axon to step down until:the fall election
and for the replacement of several members of the planning. commission. RESOLVED: Motion by Watson, second by
Schilling to ask Mr. Hoeschler to submit his resignation as Chairman of the Planning Commission and to appoint Mr.
Lindner as Interim Chair. Mr. Lindner was then asked if he would serve. He stated he has been a resident for 18 years
and has been involved with the Pianning:Cornmission for 10 years and has always attempted to balance heart and mind
in the decision. process. He further indicated he would be honored to serve in the capacity. The motion was approved
on a voteof roll call vote of 4 Aye (Watson, Rasmussen, Schilling,, Emeott) and 1 Nay (Bosak).
Mr. Watson then asked to speak on a non-agendaitem regarding Mr. Hansenhand delivering items such as this
evenings and other recent hand deliveries. Mr. Watson requested that any person, resident or land owner or their
representatives deliver only through the City via the City Clerk so that consistency of receipt of all information is
uniform in process. While unsure ofthe process (Iawversus policy), materials dropped atthe frontdoor be disposed of
Mr. Newcome then spoke indicating correspondence to. be distributed to the City Council must typically be delivered
to the City at least 2 days prior to the preparation of City Council packets. He father stated most Councils will not
consider anything "dropped in theirlaps" at a City Council meeting. Following inquiry by Attorney Newcome, Mr.
Magnusonreported that, by policy, items for Council consideration are due by the close ofbusiness on the Thursday
prior to arrieeting. Following comments from Mr. Hansen, Mr. Watson indicated a: consistent delivery pattern will help.
Mr. Watson then spoke regarding the Hillary Farm development as it may be affectedby the amendirnents contained
in (proposed) Ordinance No. 43H. He stated that as we already have an ongoing development and a Developer's
Page 2 of 17
Agreement, that we place a moratorium on the effect of local controls of 1 additional year and that the City meet with
Mr. McNulty to discuss whatissues keep usfrom collectively moving forward as effectively as possible_ He stated he
wants Hillary Farm to: be a success and asked Mr. McNulty who he would like to work With, including Mr. Nolan, our
new planner_ Mr. Watson clarified he intends the moratorium,to extend 1 year beyond the date local controls can be
modified. Motion by Watson to extend the moratorium on change of official local controls for 1 additional year to
August; 2007 from the. August, 2006 date they would otherwise expire. Schilling offereda second to the. -motion. Mr.
Bosak questioned the imposition of the cumbersome language. of Ordinance No. 43G on Mr. McNulty to which .Mr:
Watson responded he feels positive dialogue:between Mr, McNulty and Mr. Rafferty heeds to be restartedand would
meet our needs and. supported forward movement. Mr. Bosakasked Mr. McNulty ifthe year would help: and he indicated
itwould help and that he could work with Mr. Rafferty to work out problems.. Mr. Newcome then indicated the
Developer's Agreement canbe amended to address specific issues athand. .Mayor Emeott indicated the pri►nary problem
is our method of measuring building height. Mr. Rasmussen questionedwhat wegainby not moving forward with the
clarification of the new ordinance referencing Mr: McNulty's comments: at the public hearing specific to the sections
and also indicating we have already indicated a willingness to amend the Deveioper'sAgreernent to accommodate same.
He also spoke .in support of revised height definitions and the revised use of an expedited Conditional Use Permit
process, and the use Odle Plan Review process evidence the more recent results of their efforts. Mayor Emeriti then
described and supported briefiy the Plan Review Committee's process.. Mr. Rasmussen asked Mr. Rafferty .ifthey can
work with the old height ordinance and Mr. Rafferty responded in the affirmative and supported the motion. Mr.
Schilling indicated to Mr. McNulty that it is iniportantthat he get back to building houses and not sitbefore the City
Council every time they. meet. RESOLVED: Motion by Watson, second by Schilling to extend by 1 year to August,
2007 the inoratoriuni on the change of official local controls: asthey relate to the :.Hillary Farm development. On a roll
call vote the motion was unanimously approved.
Mayor Emeott then addressed (proposed) Ordinance No. 43H indicating he has prepared an Executive Summary
hand out describing the changes: proposed. It also indicates: rationaleof the changes and a reference to location of
sections_ Mayor Emeott stated that the zoning ordinance isthe heart of the city's development policy. Mayor Emeott then
reviewed several comments ofthe summary, including Comprehensive Municipal Plan requirements. Mayor Emeott also
referenced the large number of public hearings already held regarding proposed changes. He highlighted.recodification,
word smithing as it relates to Conditional Use Permits, lot coverage and open space. Mayor Eineott then opened the floor
for Council discussion. Motion by Mr_ Bosak to adopt Resolution No. 2006-20 approving proposed amendments to
Ordinance No. 43G with said amended Ordinance to be identified as Ordinance No. 4311. Second by Schilling. Mr.
Rasmussen applauded. the. Planning Commission and others efforts andlooks forward to workingwith and not on the
document. Regarding the section on grading for creation of walkouts, Mr: Rasmussen asked that the motion be amended
to delete restrictions on grading and adding more than 4 feet of fill to create artificial buildup for walkout designs. Mr.
Wasson spoke toclarify the ordinance and Mr. Rasmussen's intent. Mr. Rafferty spoke that it refers ti the.: fact that some
sites have a natural topography for creation of walkouts andsome do notand therefore the logic of site, recomniending.
elimination of the 4' dimensional .provision. Attorney Newcome then.spoke indicatingNorth Oaks provisions allow only
walkouts on lots whose natural topography provide for said design. Mr. Rasmussen asked Attorney Newcomeif policing
North Oaks provisions was difficult and Newcome responded no. Mr_ Rasmussen spoke in favor of the intent of the
provision and could support a change.: in wording. Discussion followed. Mr. Rasmussen then withdrew his modem and
Mr_ Bosak withdrew his second. Mr. McNulty thenspoke in objection to several items. Mr. Newcome. reminded Mr.
McNulty that he is exempted form these provision but would gladly review any submissions from Mn McNulty. Mayor
Emeott then provided 5 minutes for public comment. Bryan Hansen spoke charging the City Council to know this
document thoroughly as theywere not aware of Ordinance 43G provisions. The newprovisionwill take place in August -
Mayor .Emeott stated they will take place upon publication and.. Hillary Farm will not be affected until August, 2007.
Mr. McNulty spoke and recognized the 1 year moratorium and then indicated he is in a slow moving Market and his
houses don't exactly move and this could be the case. 1 year from now so how do they ask us to further extend the
moratorium .provision. Attorney Newcome said he looks forward to working with Mr. McNulty to amend. the.
Developer's Agreement to accommodate his needs in the future and this is. an "olive branch extended to Mr: McNulty
to relieve the tensions. Mr. McNulty's questions were then clarified. Mr. Griffith fo Larkin Hoffman spoke on behalf
ofthe Twin Cities Builders Association stating he was here at Mr. McNulty's requestas a member to address concern
over changes to the ordinance. He asked to work during the next year on the ordinance with the City on behalf of the
Builders Association. Mayor Emeott indicated our Willingness to work with everyone to further develop the City's
controls, including PUD provisions. Mr. Watson then spoke regarding Mr. Griffith's and Mr_ Hansen's comments and
indicated he has.readthrough the ordinance severaltirnes but would entertain delaying for Mr. Griffith and Mr. McNulty
to comment and learn oftrends. Mr. Watson asked: if delay versus amendment later was most prudent. Mayor Emeott
spoke indicating. several people have been challenged to comment including Newcome's letter to Hillary Farm group
and no continents have been received. Wecan not wait another 6 months. Discussion of time required to respond
followed with clarification by Newcome of More than adequate time with the most recent request received. today. Mr.
Griffith asked for time tostudy and. comment: Mr. Newconie indicated that opposition has been received but no solutions
or recommendations and we can't use osmosis to determine what you're thinking and that we will happily review your
written suggestions for. alteration. Mr. Schilling asked Mr. McNulty how long to.make his coirirn.ents and he responded
Page:3 of 17
3-4 days while Mr. Griffith asked for 1 week. Mr. Watson: indicated he supports.short term delay but after 2 years we
need to go :forward andit's good document which also needs recognition: Mr. Bosak supported the document. Mr.
Schilling asked if a 30: day delay is problematic. Mr. Watson. requested we provide reasonable time: for submission of
change requests by the next planning. commission:meeting. Asked ifredline versions were available, Clerk Magnuson
indicated he had a box full present. Attorney Newcome indicated friendly amendments could be considered by the City
Council and.that the matter does not need to go back to the Planning Commission but that their comments would be
relevant. Mayor .Emeott suggested utilization of the 18 July 2006 workshop to review amendments, Mr. Watson
suggested return replies. by Tuesday, 27 June 2006, for the. July. Planning. Commission it would Work. Mr. Griffith
indicated he can work in Word Perfect and could respond to: an electronic version in the time. frame: noted. Mr. Lindner
asked the Planning. Commission be changed to Monday, 10 July 2006 and duly noticed. RESOLVED:. Motion by
Watson, second by Schilling to table consideration of Resolution No. 2006-20 to July was unanimously. approved by
a roll call. vote.
Mayor Emeott proposed combining the Zoning and Subdivision ordinances to createa single land use document,
stating it's done in other cities. Mayor .Emeott asked Mr. Griffith who responded Bloomington already does this as a land
development package. Mr. Magnuson asked Mr_ Newcome'ifan additional public hearing is necessary. Mr. Emeott asked
thatthe matter be tabled to "follow consideration of Ordinance No. 43H.
Mr. Magnuson presented Ramsey County's request that. we. enter into an agreement forDispatch Services in
recognition of the new dispatch center scheduled to go online_ While we are currently paying for dispatch services
through the contract cities agreement, accounting changes for all have been made. and adjustments to reflect.
RESOLVED: Motion by Watson, second by Rasmussen to adopt Resolution No. 2006-21 was unanimously approved.
Mr. Magnuson reported that the Ramsey County Sheriffhas been successful in utilizing Administrative Offenses
ordinances andis seeking support of the City of Gem Lake to develop a consistent, common languageordinance for the
contract cities to enforce. The code could be amended to reflect additional needs of the. cities.. Magnuson explained the
process as presented. RESOLVED: Motion by Schilling, second by Bosak to support developmentof an administrative
offenses ordinance in conceit with the contract cities group was unanimously approved.
RESOLVED: Motion by Rasmussen,. second by Schilling.to hire an intern, First choice is Valerie Gross,
Mr, Magnuson introduced the problem with fees. charged bySEH. for the Highway 61/County Road E.engineering.
He then asked Mr. Higgins. to explain. Mr. Higgins. spoke regarding engineering cost:overruns on the Highway 61 /
County Road E: cooperative agreement project_ Mr. Emeott asked if the project will be completed this year and was
advised it is about to start Mr. Watson asked if.RamseyCounty. and Vadnais Heights have approved the increase and
Ramsey County has. with Vadnais Heights expected to tomorrow. Mr. Magnuson also noted that Mr. Soler has agreed
in principal that if.Ramsey County is able to access any "Unweave The Weave" funds for the project, he will dispense
those back to Gem ]rake and Vadnais Heights, RESOLVED: Motion .by .Bosak, second by Rasmussen to approve an
amendment to the Cooperative Agreement with Vadnais 1-leights and .Ramsey County for sharing of cost overruns for
engineering on the Highway 6I / County Road E. project with Gem Lake's share at $8,.337 or 21%. of the overrun
(VadnaisHeights share at$8,337 or 21 % of the overran and Ramsey County at $23,026.or 58% of the cost overrun) was
unanimously approved.
In the absence ofa motion, consideration .of the MN Association of Small Cities membership was not considered.
Mr.. Schilling. spoke in regard to the workshop scheduled for 18 July 2006 indicating it was intended: to have the 2
finalist developers present themselvea to a combined planning commission, city council, stakeholder and public forum
to facilitate the decision making process. No owner meetings have yet been scheduled butMayor Emeott encouraged.
their invitation to the workshop.
Mr. Magnuson then asked ifthe.July meeting could be rescheduled to 24 July to accommodate conflicts..with his
schedule. While Mr. Bosak will not beavailable, all others present agreedtoreschedule the July meeting to24 July 2006.
Mr. Watson reported that DeputyDari Ruettiman recommends a letter go out to the community announcing that we
want a neighborhood watch program. We. also need a meeting location, an insert to Ramsey County as web link, and a
map (possibly produced bySteve Hack 651-765-2912). Per Mayor Enteott, we need to.fund theeffort. Costs will include
maps, a mailing and a meeting place. Mayor Emeott mentioned the golfcourse; the. Montessori and fields as. possibilities.
RESOLVED: Motion by Emeott, .second by: Watson. to approve $500: for the Neighborhood Watch program was
unanimously approved.
Page 4 of 17
RESOLVED:. Motion by Bosak, Second by Rasmussen to accept the May, 2006 Treasurer's Reports as prepared
by Cobian were unanimously approved. Payment of bills $43,356.12 was unanimously approved. Mayor Emeott then
asked if current property tax payments have been received from Ramsey County .and. Mr. Magnuson responded they are.
due any day now. Mr. Magnuson also indicated he foresees a diminished time schedule in the future:
Mr. Magnuson then indicated the final 3 agenda items are carried forward as a reminder of Council's interest in
alternatives to property tax funding.
The following meetings were then confirmed and ordered published as necessary:
1) 7:00 PM 10 July 2006 Public Hearing - Land Dedication
2) 7:15 PM 10 July 2006 Planning Commission. & Public Hearing
3) 6:00 PM 18 July 2006 Joint Workshop
4) 7:00. PM 20. July 2006 Facilitated Workshop With Hartford
5) 7:00 PM 24 July 2006 Public. Hearing - 2006 Road improvements
() 7:15 PM 24 July 2006 Public Hearing - Combine Ordinances
7) 7:30 PM 24 July 2006 City Council Meeting
Tousley Ford
Tousley Ford
Nexen Group.
White Bear Township Hall
Tousley Ford
Tousley Ford
Tousley Ford
Mr. Watson then requested Mr. Magnuson present job descriptionsfor the City Clerk, City Treasurer and the City
Administrator. Mr. Magnuson indicated theseweregenerallyavailable as the State defines the City CIerk and the City
Treasurer positions. Mr. Watson agreed to take on the job of considering same for the next meeting.
Mayor Emeott then announced that this meetingwill be continued to 27 June 2006 at 4:30 PM, Nexen Building,
560 Oak Grove Parkway, Vadnais Heights, The continuation of themeeting will be closedtothe public as the City
Council will be meeting with the City Attorney to discuss pendingand ongoing litigation. Hence, the meeting willbe
closed to the public.
Mayor Emeott .at 9:24 PM then declared the meeting continued to Tuesday, 27 July 2006, at4:30 PM at the Nexen
Group building in Vadnais Heights.
AUTHORED: 23 July 2006
APPROVED: 24 Jul 2006
ATTEST: ATTEST:
FredC ' agn on . eott
City C1= Mayor
e£ile: Minutes120O61196juurs.wpd
Page 5 of 17