Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMin_85Feb13MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1985 1 A regular meeting of the Falcon Heights City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Mayor Eggert. Mayor Eggert, Councilmembers Ciernia, Baldwin, and Hard. Also present were Clerk Administrator Barnes, Attorney Gasteazoro, and Engineer Schunicht. None. Mayor Eggert moved, seconded by Councilmember Ciernia, that the Consent Agenda be approved with the removal of the Bullseye General Corporate License for later discussion. Motion carried unanimously. 1. Falcon Heights Fire Report ~~1-00185 2. Falcon Heights Ambulance Reports 4~2-00185 - ~~2-01385 3. Lauderdale Fire Reports ~~3-00185 - ~~3-00285 4. Lauderdale Ambulance Reports 4~4-00185 - 4~4-00485 5. General Disbursements 1/24/85 - 2/13/85 $87,247.75 Sinking Fund $ 117.65 6. General Payroll 1/16/85 - 1/31/85 $ 7,458.68 7. Planning Commission Minutes of February 4, 1985 8. Park and Recreation Commission Minutes of February 4, 1985 9. Statement from Howard Dahlgren Associates for January, 1985 10. Statement from Briggs & Morgan - Defeasance of Liquor Store Bonds 11. Statement from Presecutor for December, 1984 12. Licenses: General Contractor 41269 Valley Window Service 255 North 6th Street Bayport, MN 55003 Councilmember Ciernia moved, seconded by Councilmember Hard, that the Minutes of January 23, 1985 be approved as presented. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Eggert moved, seconded by Councilmember Hard, that the following items be added to the agenda: (1) Appointment of Chrolyn Wicklund, 1359 West Iowa to the Human Rights Commission, (2) Recycling, (3) Solid Waste, (4) Light Rail Transit, and (5) St. Paul Combined Sewer Program. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Eggert moved, seconded by Councilmember Baldwin, that Carolyn Wicklund, 1359 West Iowa, be appointed to the Human Rights Commission for a three year term. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Eggert moved, seconded by Councilmember Hard, that Nicholas Bauman, 1964 Carl Street, be appointed to the Fire/Rescue Department effective February 8, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Eggert moved, seconded by Councilmember Ciernia, that Resolution R-85-7 be adopted. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTES ~'' REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1985 PAGE 2 RESOLUTION R-85-7 A RESOLUTION CHANGING THE ELCTION PRECINCT BOUNDARY BETWEEN PRECINCT NUMBER AND PRECINCT NUMBER 3 Clerk Administrator Barnes presented a proposed animal control contract with White Bear Animal Control, Inc. and explained that this firm is located nearer to Falcon Heights and charges less than the present firm. He recommended changing to WBAC effective April 1, 1985. Attorney Gasteazoro recommended that the contract be amended to require owners to be charged for any costs when animals are reclaimed. Mayor Eggert moved, seconded by Councilmember Ciernia, that the contract with WBAC be approved with the addition as suggested by the City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Eggert opened the public hearing on the University Grove Storm Drainage Improvement at 7:15 P.M. and presented background information on the drainage problem. Engineer Schunicht presented a hand out on possible solutions and explained that the matter has been researched due to a letter from Veryl Andre, 2140 Folwell, which was signed by ten adjacent neighbors. He explained the possible solutions, i.e., Hoyt Avenue berming, inlet capacity increase, and installation of a relief storm sewer, and estimated costs of each. Mayor Eggert inquired if the run off would go to Lauderdale or St. Paul, to which the Engineer replied that it would probably go to Lauderdale with the construction of the retirement condominiums. RESOLUTION R-85-7 ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRACT WITH WBAC APPROVED HEARING ON GROVE STORM DRAINAGE AT 7:15 P.M. Shelia Richter, 2132 Folwell, stated that the drainage problem affects SHELIA more than the Andre lot, that during rain storms a deep lake forms at RICHTER, either end of Ford Street and you cannot drive on Folwell when it storms. 2132 She asked where the berm would be located, and if .Ford would still flood FOLWELL with improvements. Engineer Schunicht replied that Ford would still flood. Jack Miller, 2111 Hoyt, asked why it does not drain properly and if JACK MILLER, more frequent cleaning would help. The Engineer replied that regular 2111 HOYT cleaning would help; however, the old style inlets are not adequate. Fran Slagle, 2117 Hoyt, felt uncomfortable about the berm, feared it would cause flooding in other homes. She questioned assessing home- owners when the land is owned by the University of Minnesota. Clerk Administrator Barnes explained that under the University agree- ment homeowners are responsible for improvements and assessments. Engineer Schunicht assured that the berming would not cause flooding of other houses. Ruth Sparrow, 2105 Hoyt, asked where the City's obligation end and the homeowner's begin. Attorney Gasteazoro explained that the City has adopted an ordinance which provides for the method of assessing for various improvements. Ms. Sparrow wanted to know if the system was in A-1 condition when deeded to the City, to which Mr. Barnes replied that the City was not aware of any problems. Mr. Schunicht explained that at the time of acquisition it was designed reasonably well, but it is an older system and criteria changes with time. He explained that if the probject is combined with the University of MN Retirees project that the cost could be reduced by 10 to 15 percent. FRAN BEAGLE, 2117 HOYT RUTH SPARROW 2105 HOYT MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1985 PAGE 3 Jim Slagle, 2117 Hoyt, felt that by ordinary fairness assessments JIM BEAGLE should be paid by those who benefit and felt the Folwell houses cost 2117 HOYT less due to the flooding. He suggested trying the two less expensive solutions (Options 1 and 2), and that he would be opposed to assessment. Councilmember Ciernia suggested that Options 1 and 2 could be implemented, and if that is not successful, then go ahead with Option 3. Mayor Eggert felt that by doing it in stages it would be more costly, and including it with the condominium project would lower the cost. Barbara Miller, 2111 Hoyt, felt that the assessment paid on a home in BARBARA that area is higher than in the Roseville area, and in light of that MILLER fact they should not be .financing special assessments to alleviate 2111 HOYT a special problem. She requested that Council find another way to solve the problem. Mayor Eggert explained that assessing and payment from general funds are the only means by which the City can finance improvments. Ms. Miller stated she would prefer it be taken from general funds. Mayor Eggert then explained the reason the present assessment policy was adopted and that he felt it would be inappropriate to deviate from that policy. Ms. Miller felt that since part of the drainage is from St. Paul those St. Paul residents should participate. She also commented on the fact that the soil in the area is very porous so there would not be much run off. Ruth Sparrow, 2105 Hoyt, stated that some soil is sandy and becomes clay RUTH and wondered. what effect that would have on run off. Engineer Schunicht SPARROW explained that the existing pipes are very small and there would still 2105 HOYT be a problem regardless of the soil. PUBLIC HEARING Mayor Eggert closed the public hearing at 8:00 P.M. CLOSED Mayor Eggert feld there were two ways in which the handle the matter: (1) implement Options 1 and 2 initially, and Option 3 if that fails to ENGINEER TO solve the problem, and (2) due to contribution of run-off by residents OBTAIN CO5T of St. Paul, and that City refuses to participate, Falcon Heights could ON PROJECT possible use TIF funds for the project. Councilmember Hard suggested IF INCLUDED that the matter be deferred until it can be determined what the project IN U OF MN would cost if included in the improvements for the condominium project. CONDO Council concurred and directed the Engineer to obtain prices for the PROJECT combined projects. Mayor Eggert presented the conditional use request from Lido Cafe, Inc., LIDO CAFE 1611 W. Larpenteur, to use the property at 1700 St. Mary's as a parking CONDITIONAL lot. John Labalestra, representing the Lido, explained the reasons for USE REQUEST the expansion, to provide a larger deli take-out and banquet facility, FOR PARKING and addition of a lounge. He stressed the fact that their survival is LOT AT depending upon this expansion, and that they feel they have the. support 1700 ST. of Falcon Heights residents at large. Mr. Labalestra estimated they MARY'S ST. currently have 87 employees and with the addition will have 115 to 120. He then addressed such items as plans, parking arrangements, cul-de-sac on St. Mary's, emergency access, employee parking, number of seats in establish- ment, and parking ratio. Councilmember Hard commented on the fact that the Fire Department is concerned regarding access if it is decided to cul-de-sac St. Mary's. Mr. Labalestra stated they have addressed sharing parking with MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1985 PAGE 4 Hermes with no success. He also read into the record a letter once again requesting shared parking with the Hermes and transfer of a portion of the alley to the Lido Cafe. Randy Gustafson, 1775 St. Mary's, inquired as to lounge hours and RANDY entertainment. Mr. Labalestra explained they had tried entertainment GUSTAFSON in the past and felt it was not needed. They do not at present plan 1775 ST. to have entertainment, but would like to leave all options open. Hours MARYS would depend upon flow of customers. Mayor Eggert informed that three of the four Councilmembers had attended the Planning Commission meeting on February 4th and all had copies of the Citizens Committee reports and the Dennis Smith letter. Ted Meyer, 1710 St. Mary's, stated he was not speaking on behalf of TED MEYER the Committee but would enjoin their report and would recommend Scheme 1710 ST. E. He then commented on items that he felt had not been dealt with MARYS reference to the ordinance relating to conditional use requests, i.e., pages 268-270 of the code, subdivisions 5c, d, e and 1. Mr. Meyer raised the following issues: (1) Planning Commission denied conditional use by a 6-1 vote, (2) the City does not have authority to grant a conditional use if property values are to be depreciated, and he felt there was no question that values will be seriously depreciated, (3) a conditional use must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if the use of the property for a parking lot is appropriate it should have been done at the time the Plan was adopted, and (4) the Committee and citizens were willing to compromise, but have seen no evidence that the Lido is compromising. Mr. Meyer was concerned that if a conditional use is granted the property could continue to be used for parking even though the property is sold. He commented on the use of the Hermes alley, shared parking and vacation of St. Mary's and argued that any scheme other than Scheme E would be an intrusion moving up the street. He felt they were insulated from the commercial district as is, however, did acknowledged that the Labestra plan would provide insulation. Mr. Meyer stated he was not willing to agree to the vacation of St. Mary's and if the conditional use is granted for the Croft property he will have no choice but to commence a lawsuit for compensation for damages to his property, and enforce application of the code. He also stated that it is ill advised and should be defeated. Councilmember Hard referred to the neighborhood report as it related to covenants. Mr. Meyer said he was prepared to sign a covenant for residential use which would be ideal if all agree, but would not, how- ever, unless it is also agreed that the Croft property will be owner occupied, single family. Councilmember Hard felt that property values would decrease with the covenant to which Mr. Meyer replied that if all sign it would be an enhancement. Councilmember Baldwin commented on the fact that if the Lido is not allowed the expansion, they will not stay in business there, and there could be an impact on property values if a business of lesser quality should take over. Mr. Meyer stated that Lido has no impact on his property and he has little concern over what is in the business area. Councilmember Baldwin expressed the opinion that a cul-de-sac, berming, and having a more sightly corner would increase property values. Mr. Meyer stated he felt the cul-de-sac would have a negative effect, and in reply to an inquiry from Councilmember Ciernia, replied that access to Larpenteur is more convenient. 1~ MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1985 PAGE 5 1 f] Mayor Eggert explained that the Planning Commission discussion focused COUNCIL- on Scheme E and he does not see Scheme E as a viable solution in view PLANNER/ of the lack of cooperation of the Hermes. In his opinion, there are LABALESTRA three options: do not honor the request, honor as presented, or honor request but request a scaling down of the project. John Labalestra stated that he felt one of the major reasons the conditional use was denied by the Planning Commission is that they felt Scheme E was a viable solution due to a report given by the Planner at that. meeting. He then referred to Planner John Uban's letter of February 8, 1985 stating that Scheme E is based on a 30 foot addition (not 50) and shared parking, and without these, Scheme E does not work. He felt this was made clear at the Planning Commission meeting. Planner John Uban commented on his previous memorandums relating to the project and that the fact that without shared parking the Croft property would be needed for parking. He noted such items as where does commercial stop and residential begin, the commercial area is very constrained and difficult for development, the need to support both healthy commercial and residential areas. He explained that with a 30 foot expansion. (which is critical to Scheme E) there would be a need for granting variances for setbacks and parking ratios. Mr. Uban suggested contracting. with Buck's Unpainted Furniture for additional parking (Lido at present has arrangement for some shared parking at Buck's) before going farther. He had contacted the owners of Buck's and they will entertain the vacation of St. Mary's and shared parking. Mr. Uban was of the opinion that parking in front or left of Bucks should be party of any agreement. Mr. Labalestra stated that they are now under an agrement with the lessee to use eleven parking spaces on the east side, and can use the west side of the building for employee parking, however, cannot use spaces south of Bucks. Even if the owners of the property are amenable, the lessee is not. Dennis Smith, 1725 St. Mary's, commented on the concern of the Citizens DENNIS SMITH are indicated by the attendance at meetings, Mr. Meyer's dedication to 1725 ST. the cause and his willingness to give up a pack portion of his property. MARYS Mr. Smith urged Council to place great weight on the decision of the Planning Commission. Barb Smith, 1725 St. Mary's, wished to clarify that the Committee was charged with working with the plan provided three months previously, and that they had just recently seen the new plan. All of their work was based on the old plan. Dr. Snyder, Management Consultant to the Lido Cafe, informed that the Lido is highly disciplined operations, having full control of the operation and people, and have a consistent leadership which improves with age. Dr. Snyder was of the opinion that sale of alcohol at the Lido will not increase greatly due to the new drunken driving laws. He sees the Lido as a restaurant with good food, a community place for family outings, with a long range growth. Liquor is no longer a way of making money as in the past. BARB SMITH 1725 ST. MARYS DR. SNYDER MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT TO LIDO MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING ~ FEBRUARY 13, 1985 ~ 4~~ PAGE 6 Lolita Keck, 1776 St. Mary's, stated that granting the conditional LOLITA use request does not guarantee the Lido's success. She questioned KECK their timing, type of establishment, entertainment, ratio of liquor 1776 ST. to food, discrepancy in seating numbers. She felt the City was MARYS taking abet with the Lido which could end with losing after vacating St. Mary's, condemning the Hermes alley, and providing Tax Increment financing. Ms. Keck felt the City should not be subsiding construction, allowing destruction of the Croft home and gardens and still wind up with a half completed commercial area. Dr. Eggert replied that Council should not consider approval of the conditional use unless they understand the other steps. Rod VondeLinde, 1734 St. Mary's, said the Planning Commission was ROD not confused when they denied the conditional use, and he felt VONDELINDE the Commission was concerned that Falcon Heights is a residential 1734 ST. community and wanted to keep it that way. He indicated that the MARYS neighborhood is unified regarding the Lido matter, there is a scare in the neighborhood. He felt the conditional use would not affect the decision makers and asked that Council consider how they would feel. Mr. VondeLinde's young son commented on children's balls going into the Croft lot and into the street. Walt McCoy, 1746 St. Mary's, explained that he is an FHA Appraiser WALT MC COY and from his experience residences next to businesses have less value 1746 ST. because there is less appeal to prospective buyers. He felt that the MARYS fact that the Croft lot faces St. Mary's, it would lower real estate values more than the present business facing Larpenteur. Mr. McCoy stated he was opposed to the conditional use being ranted and removal of the Croft house. Pete Navtzeny, 1720 St. Mary's stated he knows the Lido well and has PETE NAVTZENY no objection to the business, however, he did object to changing 1720 ST. residential to commercial and felt the residential property will MARYS decrease in value. He went on record as being opposed to parking on the Croft property. Attorney Fred Kueppers, representing Mr. and Mrs. Norbert Hermes, FRED KUEPPERS' commented on the Hermes' unwillingness to join in shared parking. ATTORNEY He felt they have good reasons and were not refusing due to animosity FOR MR. AND or stubbornness. He stated that the parking on the Hermes property MRS. NORBERT just meets what is required and by sharing they would have less than HERMES the required parking. If Hermes should sell or change use, the parking could become significant. He felt the Hermes reluctance is well founded. Mr. Jueppers then commented on the fact that Mr. Labalestra needs use of the. Croft property for parking, which is not a soft use, but full utilization of the property. He also questioned what the community would get for the deal in view of the Tax Increment Financing, and stressed the fact that the neighborhood, Planner John Uban, and Planning Commission thinks it does not work. He suggested that Council deny the conditional use and felt it was reasonable to deny the request. Randy Gustafson, 1775 St. Mary's, felt there were too many "maybes", RANDY uncertainty regarding what will happen to the street, parking on GUSTAFSON, the street. He felt id did not make sense to approve the request when 1775 ST, the Planning Commission denied it and the ordinance does not allow it. MARYS MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1985 PAGE 7 John Labalestra stated they want to remain in Falcon Heights, they have been patient, do not feel the request is unreasonable, they will not be an infringement on the neighborhood. He felt Council has a difficult decision; however, if the request is denied, it will be necessary to go elsewhere. Mayor Eggert explained that if Council should decide the conditional use is appropriate they should be aware of the implications as follows: (1) necessity to proceed with a cul-de-sac on St. Mary's and the use of St. Mary's easement for parking, (2) need to start condemnation of the alley in view of the fact that alley sharing is not likely to come about, and (3) the Lido will be asking for utilization of Tax Increment Financing--a tool that has been used for other developments. Mr. Kueppers commented on the fact that if St. Mary's is vacated, half would go to Bucks and the Lido would still lack parking. Mayor Eggert replied that there are other alternatives such as making the area public parking lot, and perhaps, using Tax Increment funds for the lot. Councilmember Baldwin stated he had the impression that people think the City wants to do something for the Labalestra's, agreed that the relatiotship between the City has been good, however, that relation- ship does not outweigh the fact that the residents of St. Mary's feel and say about their street is true, it is lovely residential street. The City must look at what is needed for any business to survive on that corner with the present configuration, personalities of the Labalestras and the residence on St. Mary's must be removed. Mr. Baldwin felt that in looking at the plan he sees definite advantages for the citizens: (1) the residents can look at a more sightly corner, (2) a more clearly de- marked business zone, and (3) an insulation from the businesses on that corner that have in the past,. and will in the future, effect the resi- dential neighborhood in the area. Councilmember Ciernia inquired about the comment that a conditional use is not appropriate under the ordinance. Attorney Gasteazoro stated that what. Council needs to do is make sufficient findings that it does meet the conditions referred to tonight, and drew attention to Subdivision (1) of the Code which summarizes the section under discussion at this meeting. Ms. Gasteazoro commented on the fact that one attorney has stated that the conditional use would depreciate the property, and stressed that the Code stipulates "seriously" depreciates surrounding property values. She expressed confidence that numerous appraisers would have different opinions. Councilmember Ciernia state3he felt the Lido is a valued business to the City and that it is important that we have a quality business district; however, the well maintained residential is of great value to the City. Councilmember Ciernia addressed the following concerns: (1) is a precedence being set? (2) Council did not tamper with the residential property when the Bullseye project was being discussed, (3) if Council decides to go ahead, there should be a set of conditions, entertainment, management of parking, employee use, the conditions to run with the property, (4) if the cul-de-sac is to be put in place, there should still be an exit to the south to minimize impace on Fry and Maple Knoll, however, prohibit traffic from going north. Mr. Ciernia also compared the use of the Hermes Lot 7 to the Croft property and the similarities. ^~' ~, MAYOR EGGERT COUNCILMEMBER BALDWIN COUNCILMEMBER CIERNIA COUNCILMEMBER CIERNIA MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1985 PAGE 8 Councilmember Hard made the following points: (1) health, general COUNCILMEMBER welfare, etc. would be enhanced by a cul-de-sac, (2) felt the covenant HARD requiring owner occupied homes would decrease value as it would limit buyers, (3) rental property is lucratiNe in the area due to the close proximity to the University of Minnesota and Harvest States, and (4) he would recommend shared parking with Harvest States, especially for banquet parking, with establishment of a more defined pedestrain walk- way, perhaps with Tax Increment Financing. He felt one condition that should be required with the conditional use is that there be a written agreement between Harvest States and the Lido for shared parking. Mr. Labalestra stated he did not feel shared parking with Harvest States is necessary but Harvest States has indicated a willingness to share. Mayor Eggert commented on the effect of deterioration of the business MAYOR area which is most evident on the northeast corner of Larpenteur and EGGERT Sneling, and the effect of deterioration on adjacent residences. He felt the business deterioration must detrimentally impact on the residential, and as business districts age, they must be kept up, if not the effects are broader than just the business district itself. Mayor Eggert also felt the Comprehensive Plan addresses that issue directly and there would be sufficient basis in the Plan to go forward with the kind of proposal that is being presented here. Some potential conditions he recommended were refuse, employee parking, hours of operation, style of entertainment, and screening. He also commented on the fact there is a distinct possibility there will be some type of legal action taken relating to property values. Councilmember Baldwin suggested agrement in principal contingent upon conditions and Mayor Eggert felt the conditional use should not remain in effect unless the project goes to completion. Councilmember Hard moved, seconded by Councilmember Baldwin, that the CONDITIONAL conditional use permit be approved contingent upon agreement between USE APPROVED the City and Lido Cafe, Inc., as to handling of contingencies expressed WITH by Council relating to management of the facility, scope and scale of CONTINGENCIES entertainment, parking, minimum improvements, refuse screening, berming, and screening, and hours of operation. Motion carried unanimously. Councilmember Hard moved, seconded by Mayor Eggert, to extend the MEETING meeting not to exceed 10:45 P.M. in order to allow time for the EXTENDED TO items on the agenda relating to Bullseye Golf. Motion .carried 10:45 P.M. unanimously. Robert Collins, Attorney for Bullseye Golf, was in attendance to BULLSEYE request a variance on parking for retail sales at 1707 North Snelling, GOLF and a conditional use to install a spray paint booth at the same CONDITIONAL address. He reviewed the problems with the construction timetable, and USE AND acquisition of the property at 170$ North Snelling, which was delayed VARIANCE by a loss of the certificate of title. Mr. Collins then presented REQUEST a new-time-schedule prepared by the contractor, Kraus-Anderson. Following a short discussion, Mayor Eggert moved, seconded by CONDITIONAL Councilmember Hard, that the conditional use for the spray paint USE APPROVED booth be approved subject to obtaining the proper permits and approval FOR SPRAY PAINT BOOTH 1 MINUTES REGULAR CITY FEBRUARY 13, PAGE 9 COUNCIL MEETING 1985 by the building inspector, electrical inspector and fire inspector. Upon a vote being taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Eggert, Councilmembers Ciernia and Hard, and the following voted against the same: Councilmember Baldwin. Motion carried. Councilmember Baldwin referred to his letter of February pointing out PARKING his concerns regarding violations of the development agreement. Mayor VARIANCE Eggert explained that the decreased construction value shown on the buildingAPPROVED permit is the same as the amount certified by Ramsey County. Following UNTIL 5/1/85 the discussion, Councilmember Hard moved, seconded by Mayor Eggert, that the parking variance be granted with a May 1 ,1985 deadline as recommended by the Planning Commission. Any further extension will be considered at that time. Councilmember Ciernia offered an amendment requiring that neither Bullseye employee vehicles or Bullseye commercial vehicles be parking in the parking lot at 1707 North Snelling or on the street. Councilmember Hard and Mayor Eggert accepted the amendment and upon a vote being taken, the following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Eggert, Councilmembers Ciernia and Hard, and the following voted against the same: Councilmember Baldwin. Motion carried. Mr. Collins requested time for a presentation by the architect for the ADJOURNMENT project after which Mayor Eggert moved a fifteen minute extension. Motion died for lack of a second. Meeting was adjourned at 10:50 P.M. .~ ) ~ ~ rl ~, / y, onald C. Eggert, .D., Mayor ATTEST: ll ,t~'~ ~ .~/ ewan B. Barnes, Clerk Administrator Regular City Council Meeting of February 13, 1985