The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12-18-84 Council Special MinutesMINtJ'CLS OP TI~IE SP~CIAL MP]sTSDIG CITX COUNCIL LITTLP CANADA, MITINI:,SOTA Agenda Item No, 1 Agenda Item No. 7_ Pursuant to due cal.l and noti.ce thereof a speci.al meeting of the Counci.l oE the City of LittLe Canada, Minnesota was helcl on the 18th day of. December, 1.984 i.n the Counci.l Chambers of: the City Center located at 515 Li[~le Canlda ;'.oad i~~ said City. December 1£3, 19£~4 Mayor. Raymond }[anson chai.red the meeting and called it to order at 6:31. P.M. and the followinp members were present at ro11 call: MTMI3ER5 I'RPSIiNT: T4ayor Counci.lman Counci.lman Cotmci.l.woman Council~voman Mr. Raymond [-lanson Mr. Mi.chael Pahey Mre Dennis Por.sberg Mrs. M~gs Nar<lini ~rs, Beverly Scalze ALSO PRT'SPN'T: Ci.ty Clerlc City Attorney City Planner Recor.din~ Secretary Mr. Joseph C1~lebecic Mr. 7'homas Sweeney i4r.. David Licht Mrs. Kathleen Glanzer Larry Lee Mr. Flanson cal.led the public hearin~; to order regarding the Larry Rezoni.ng Lee request to r.ezone single [amily residenti.al properCy located RequesC on and abuttin~ South Owasso i~l.vd<, ~vest of 35P and east of the Publ.i.c Watenaor.lcs r.i.ght-of-way to Li~ht Industri.al. Mr. t{anson read Hearing the hearing notice and the mailing list. Agenda Mr. Lee descri.bed the property in question to the audience. Mr. Item No. 3 Lee expLai.ned that he i.s not propos:ing that the property access onto Condui.t. Mr. Lee stated that the grade of the property woutd make thi.s impractical. Mr. Lee is also proposin~; a 60 foot Uuffer zone on the south of: the property. Mr. Lee explai.ned that the property would access South Owasso I31vd. which i.s a 9-ton road. 7'he build:ings that he is proposi.ng for the site are simi.lar to those he i.s currently bui.lding. They cooulci be fab-con bui.ldings, or pre-casC structures. Mr. Lee also reported that f.rom the south looking nor.th, the buil.din~;s would not be visible due to T.he dif[erence in grades and the trees, Mr. Lee stated that. he would have simi.lar-type tenants as are i.n hi.s existing partc and he already has two people inter.ested i.n buildi.ngs< ihr. Lee reported that the buildings he is pro}~osing would be 18 feet in hei.ght. Mr. Sam Fasciana asked Mr. Lee why he wants to start a second project, when his Eisst one i.s a mess. Mr. Lee repl:i.ed that k~e ~i.s do:ing one more building in his current project and then he has no more land lef.t to build on in that area. Pa~e -1.- MINU'CES Ci.ty Oouncil Dec. 1£3, 19E14 I.ee Rezon:i.ng Mr. i:d Nadeau commented that Che I.,ee development ~roposal will not: (Cont.) give people from Littl.e Canada jobs, but will. bri.ng in ~eopl.e Erom somewhere else. Mr. I,ee stated that the development cai.ll brin~; business to the Ci-ty, Mr. Dla<leau commented that there is more to Che quali.ty of l.i.fe in a City than just business, Mr. Ron Lachenmeyer of i3urke Lane appeared Uefore the Counci.l. and commentedthat: there i.s more than just i.nctustri.al zon:ing in thi.s area. Lachenmeyer commented that there is the ~vaterworlcs property that creates a natural buf.fer. L,aclcenmeyer stated that the resi<lents of T~urlce Lane are. concerned about thei.r area becomi_ng the only resi.dential property i.n the area. They are also concerned about the property Chat Mr. Lee has out to Condui.t. Mr. Pasciana sCated that if the Lee property is rezoned, he would requesC i,i.~;ht Indust:ri.al. zoni.np, for his proper.ty also. Mr. Lachenmeyer stated that he heard that ballf:i.elds were bei.ng proposed in the area. I,achenmeyer stated th~t the Ilurke Lane residents might be interested i.n somethi.n~; like that, but pointed out that they were never approached with the i.dea. Mr. Lee stated that the Park Commissi.on turned down his offer of ballfields. Mrs. Scalze stated tha[ the reason that this was done was thaC the fields would be too smai.l and thc~ C1.Cy i.s in need of lar~er f.i.elds. P9r. Lachenmeyer. stated that he is a rea). estate apprai.ser and the rezoning ~oould aclversely effect }3urke Lane. Lachenmeyer stat:ed tl~iat a bank ~vould not even write a mortgage on a house i.n thi.s area if. the Lee property were rea.oned. P%[r. Fahey reported that Mr. Lee i.ndi.cated that the property is not deveLopable as resi.dential. Mr. Lachenmeyer d:i.sagreecl. Mr. Lachenmeyer stated t.tiat he thought there were possi.bilities f.or the resi.dential development of the property. Mr. t,achenmeyer also stated that he di.sa~;reed that the development of this property as li.ght industrial. would lower the mi11 rate i.n the Ci.ty. P4r. I.,achenmeyer stated that the residents of Rurke Lane can af.ford theis taxes, but cannot af.ford their homes being devalued. I,achenmeyer also pointed out that the ~omprehensi.ve Plan call.s Eor the pr.operty to remai.n residenti.al.. Lachenmeyer sCated Chat he could see an R-2 zoning on the pr.operCy, but f.e].t that industrial zoni.ng would riain a ni.ce p:iece of ~roperty. Mr. Lee stated t1~at his devel.opment would not access on Condui.t, Uut rather Country Drive. Lee also questioned the det~aluati.on of the t3url<e Lane pro~erty. Lee po:inted out other property in the area with ~3-3 or. I-1 zonin~; that could also develop and affect Burtm Lane. Pa~;e -2- ~zNUTrs Ci.cy Counci.l. Uece 18, 1.984 Lee Rer.onin~; Mr. I,achenmeyer stated that they caere a~aare of the z,oni.ng of: th:is (Cont.) property when they bought their properti.es, but were assured that Mr. Lee's property caas R-l. Lachenmeyer also was concerned that if the Lee property -is rezoned, then other properties in the area will probably be r.eroned also. Mrs. 1{ittner staCed that if the loch and i'asciana properties are r.ezoned, then Che 13urke Lane resi.dent:s wi.ll. have no control over cahat type of deveiopment noes i.n on these properties. }littner staCed that by the Lee property remaini.ng R-1, it :i.s the insurance f:or Tiurke Lane to keep industri.al development away from i.ts badc door. T4r.s. 7och stated that it is :i.n wr.i.ting i.n the Comprehensive Plan that the first tier of. lot:s on the east side of Conduit should be abl.e to develop as R-I3. Mrs. 'Goch stated that they wanted from the beginning to lceep the area R-]., buC they lost out ancl >urrotmding pr.operti.es ~aer.e rez.oned. Mrse 7och stated that over the years many thi_ngs have been pr.oposed for the I,ee property, and Mrs. 7.och <1i.d not feel. L-hat Mr. Lee's proposal. was so bad. Mr. Nadeau stated that the Gagne ~roperty caas the fi.rst :in the area to be rezoned industri.al, and he just followed suit with hi.s property. Mr< Hanson pointed out that the property was already being used as commer.cial. Mr. Pasciana stated that i.f. the Ci.ty rezones the L,ee property, it shoul.d r.ezone the other property i.n the area as well and end the contr.oversy. Mr. Jansen stated that he was in agreement wi.th thaC, also. ~Ir. Lachenmeyer suggested that the City l<eep the area resi.denti.al.. Mr. Lee f.e1t, that the spot aoni.ng in Che area was the r.esi.dential property. Mr. Pahey poi.nted out that the trailer court is a residential use. Pahey stated that he was not convinced that tk~e property should be rezoned industrial and suggested that perhaps R-7_ PUD cai.Ch bufEering would be appr.opr:iate. Mr. P'ahey f.elt that the City has been cut up i.n the past and Chat there may not have been enough concern given to the residential property in the City i.n Che past. Mr. Lee po:i.nted out that i.n June the Ylanner did an analysi.s of. Che property and his recommendati.on was that the property shouLd be rezoned. D4r. I.ee did not feel that the property could develop as residential. Pa~;e -3- MzNU•rrs Ci.ty Counci.l. Pec. 18, 19f34 Lee P.ezoni.ng Mr. Lachenmeyer staY.ed Chat the ar.ea was a nice one and f.elt i.t a shame (Cont:.) if the area developed as industrial. Lachenmeyer stated that the Comprehensi.ve Plan stressed thi.s area as a residenti.al one. S.achenmeyer explained to the Counci.l the area and its abundance oE oak trees. Mr. 7,och di.sagreed and stated that the area was swampy. Z,och staCed that he was not i.n favor of apartments or condominiums in the area. Mr. Norm llorton, a f.ormer Planner Commi.ssion member, stated that: the Planning Comm:issi.on discussed Chis area as a pri.me i.ndustrial site 10 years ago. Mrs. Scalze stated that currently ~here are some very expensive homes on I~urke Lane. Mr. Lachenmeyer pointed out that the Planni.n~; Commissi.on voted to deny the rezoning. 44r. 7,il.ge stated that he drove through the Larry Lee comp7.ex and f.eel.s i.t is an asseC to the communi.tya Mr. Fahey commented that no one is disptiting that Mr. Lee builds a quali.ty building. Mr. Pahey also stated that i.f he lived on T3urke Lane, he, too, would be agai.nst the re2oni.np, requesC. P1r. Nadeau aslced if Condui.t became an in<(ustri.al road, if it would go all the way through to I~ittle Canada Road. Mr. kianson did not f.eel this feasi.ble. Mr. Hanson aslced if Mr. P'ascitina would consider a lower zoning than industri.al. Mr. T'asciana sug;ested that tk~e Ci.ty just leave Che zones as they are< Mr. L'asci.ana suggested that the City make a deci.si.on and sti.ck by it, Fasci.ana poi.nted out that the Ci.ty has a Comprehensive Plan thaC recommends the property remai.n residentia7.. Mr. Li.cht pointed out thathis current report on the proposal lool<s aC the surrounding proper.ty uses and points out that they are not condusi.ve to s:ingle £amily homes. Mr. Li.cht stated that there is noChing that would preclude the mobi.lehome park from developi.ng commerci.ally Comorrow. Mr. Licht stated that: he cannot see si.ngie f.ami.ly homes in the area. The Planner staCed that hi.s posi.ti.on has been because of the surr.ounding uses, t6e Lee requcsC seems lilce a logical extensi.on inCO the area, but the exi.sting housi.ng in the area should be protected, 7'his could be done ~aith a tr.ansitional use. The Planner also stated that the City has a poli.cy of being against additional mulCiple family development, Itowever~ 4-plexes or town- houses mi.Fht be accepttible. The Planner stated LhaC the Counci.l deci.sion i.s a judgement callo ktowever, there are protecti.ons that can be afforded to the surrounding Pag,e -4- nzzN~rrEs City Counci.l. Dec. ].8, 1984 Lee Rezontng development as the Counci.l sees f:i.t. The area could be zoned a PUU (Cont.) wher.e the Ci.ty could have control. P4r. Ilanson commented that i.f the proper.ty remains residential, the issue will come bacic Uefore the Council again. Mr. Lee pointed out that he i.s provi.ding a 60 foot buffer zone from the Pasciana property. Mr. I'asciana dici not feel this was enou~;h< Nfr. Lee stated that he ~aas not opposed to a 100 foot buffer. Lee also suggested that it cou].d be made an outl.ot and this would offer ~rotecti.on to the people to the south. tsir. Lee pointed out that a peti.tion has been f;.led with 12 people against the development and 67 in favor of it. Mr. ilanson asiced the attorney about the petitione The Attorney repli.ed thaC the petiti.on i.s not legally compelling £or. conclusi.on of the rezoning. Thtis type of petiti.on di.f:fer.s from a publi.c improvement peti.ti.on. P1r. Lee stated ChaT, he ~aas just poinCing ouC ChaC ther.e are a lot of people i.n f.avor of: the rezoning. Mrs. Sca12e questioned declaring the buffer zone an outlot would protect the F3urlce Lane residents. 'Lhe Ylam~er srated that the status of an outlot can be changed, but it would requi.re the hearing process. An outiot as it stands cannot be issued a bui.lding permit. Mrs. Scalze stated thz~t she f.elt that Mr. Lee could have done a better job i.n putting thi.s proposal. together. Scal.ze stated that the City has triecl to caorlc wi.th Mr. Lee. Mr. Lee stated Chat if he proposed a str.i.p oE residential property be developed on the south of the property in question, these property owners woul.d be f:aced with Chei.r proper.ty abutting, industrial property a1so. htrs. Scalze repli_ed but aC ~.P.25C these peopl.e would have knoom about it when buyi.ng t}tei.r proper[i.es. Mr. Lee statecl that if he ].i.ved on ]3urlce Lane he c.~ould Ue more concerned about the current indusCrial property in the area than hi.s property. Mr. L'ahey commented that clie L~e pr.oposal is the same one that was before the City si.x months ago except wa.th the additi.on of a buf.F.er. zone. Mrs. locli statec! Chat if the property across the sCreet Erom her had remained residential, she woulci have been ~&~inst the Lee proposal. ~1rs. 7,och stated that as i.t sits, her property is not sal.eable for residential. I.ots. P4rs. 'l.och stated that at [he ti.me the property across from her was proposed f.or i.ndustrial she spol<e wi.th the owner of. the 13urlce Lane property and he was aware that the area may go commcrcial.. Page -5- MINU'PFS Ci.t:y Council Dec. 18, 19£S4 Lee Rezoni.n~; (Cont.) Mrs. %och statect she did not thinlc she ~aould rather go in. that even if the Lee property remained resictential, this would hel.p her property. 7,och stated that see Mr. I.ee develop the property Chan apartments ~Ir. Pahey stated that he is not in favor oL apartments or condomi.niums on thi.s property. Mrs. 7,och pointed out that i1r. Nusnich was offered trailer court zoning on his property, but he rejected i.t and wanCed his property to remai.n commercial. Mr.. Norm I3rody, an attorney and a developer, stated thai: he owne<t properCy in Li.ttle Canada and he f.el.t that the Lee devel.opment was we ll.-concei.ved. Srody stated that he di.sagr.eed that the development could not exi.st near residential. 13rody fe1C that ivi.th the proper. buLfering, the devel.opment would be an asset to the community. Mr. i~rody did not teel that the area would develop resi.dentially. ~f~rody stated that Mr. Lee's plan ~aas a good one and in the fuCUre, the Ci.ty may not get a plan as good. ^1r. Hanson stated that he would have Iiked to see the people in Che area get togeCher anct work out the pr.oUl.em. P4r. I.ee stated that he could come in with a p].an f:or a mixed-use residential on the south end of the property, Mr. Hanson pointed out Chat the issue tonight is that Mr. I.ee will lose out on some industrial revenue bonds at the end of. the year. Mr. Lachenmeyer d'td not Lee1 i.t fair to push the plan through at the end of the year. Mrs. Scalz.e pointed out thaT, the Council suggested tha:: Mr. Lee worlc with the res~i.dents of: the arel prior. to coming to the Council.. Scalze sCaCed that she thi.nks T9r. Lee could have made the plan wortc. Mr. Lee stated that the area coants resiclential development. Mr. Lackienmeyer commented thaC Mr. Lee did not gi.ve them any alternatives. Mr. Forsberg, felt that the plan would have woriced if it had been ?_/3rd's i.ndustri.al an<1 1/3 resiclential with the proper buffering. Mr. 1,achenmeyer stated that the i3urlce Lane area was excited when they heard that a park area was being proposed. Nlrs. Nardini. stated that she LeLt thaC the Parlc Commiss:ion was agai.nst the park plan proposed because of: the hi~;h cost of. pi.ping a porti.on of. the proper.t:.y. Page -6- j12NUTL:S Ci.ty Council. Uec. 18, 1984 Lee Rezoning ^1r, Lee aslcecl :Lf t.he resi.dents in the area pref:erred a resi.dent:i.al (Cont.) buffer to an open bu£fer. Ntrs. Hitner replied thae a resi.dential. buf:fer esCablished the area as resi<tential. Mr. l~ahey statecl thaC if. homes are present as part of Che buffer, then it wovld be hard to come baclc later and try to get ehe propercy rezonecl. i9r. Pahey stated that if Mr. Lee ~ets the nei.~;hborhood sunporC for a proposal, then he woulcl not hzive a probtem. Mr. Lee aslced if the City k*~s ~greeable to approvi.n~; a rezoni.ng and ].eav:i_ng a certai.n number of feet on the south as residenti.al. Mrs. 7och po:inted out thaC she di.d noC thi.n?c the Counci.l could acC on any chan~e i.n the rezon.ing reyuest ~nd coul<1 only act on the proposal Uef.ore them at the moment. Mr.. I'orsUerg commented that the Counc~i_1 and Mr. Lee wer.e discussing options at this poinC. Mr. 1Tahey felt that i_f hir. 1,ee's request was denied, some develo~er would come in with a proposal Chat contained the ri.;;ht el.ements. ~1r. Pahey f:elt that Mr. Lee's proposal was asking for Coo much. Nlr. Lee sup;gested that t:he south 300 feet of the property remai.n IZ-l. Mr. Tahey suggested that Che City hold a meet:i.ng on Che z.oni.n~; f.or the whol.e area. Fahey felt the area should be studied and the City shoul.d tailce i.ts ti.me and come up wi.th a proposal tk~at makes sen,e for everyone. Mr. Prattal.one stated th~C he thou~l~t Mr. Lee's pr.ojecC was a pood one for the City. Frattalone stated that ttie elevation of the property was not a good one for putt:ing in resi.denti.al I~omes and because of. the filli.nK that woul.d have to be done, most of. CFte trees on the property woul.d be Lost. Mr. PratCalone felt that the residents of [he area would be better of.f ~aith a business next to them than b~llfields. Prattalone poi_nted out that af:ter 6 o'cloclc, most business are closed> Mr. 1[anson aslced Che possibili[y oL A1r. I,ee's getting an extensi.on on his industrial revenue bonds. The Attorney replied that he understood that the bonds must be c7.osed on bef.ore the end of the year, Mrs. Scalze f.el.t that the Ci.ty sktould gi.ve Mr. Lee more t.i.me to come up coi.th a compr.omi.>e< 'Che resi.denl-s of: the area staCed that tk~ey ~aould l.ilce to see a drawi.ng showing the residential. buff.er zone on the southern porti.on of the property bef.ore they could say o~hecher or not they cooutd be i.n favor of. thac< Page -7- N,f INItTES City Counci.l nec. 18, 1984 Lee Rezoning Mr. Lee stated that the ordi.nance wouLd regul.at_e size of Lots and other (ConC.) concerns. Lee aslced that i£ it is the Council's concensus that chey apnrove a residential. bulfer zone of 350 feet with two t_iers of l.ots and street system. i3asi_call.y, thi.s Looul<1 el.i.minate Cwo bui_l.dings. T4r. Lee stated that it: wouLd be reasonable to have a loop system rather than a dead end str.eeC. The Counc.il Col.d hfr. Lee that they woulcl have to see a plan before gi.vi.ng any approval. Counci.7. discussed whether there was enough time i.n Che year to have another meeting to review a new P1an. *'[rs. Scalze informed the audience that with f~iscal. di.sparat.i.es, Che City on1.y lcecps 60% of: the taxes generatecl by busi_nesses, and the otlier 40% gces i.nto a pool. to be spli.t amonp, ci.ties that do not have as much commerci.al devel.opment. tdith resi.clen[i_al devel.opment, the C:i.Cy lceeps a11 the tax dol.l.ars. Mr. Nadeau su~;gested Chat perhlps the Ci.ty h~.is Coo much indusCri.al land. Mrs. Scal.ze asl.ced i.f. the Counci.7. could do anything with the propert:y once the issue. i.s settled ~hat i.t would not be rezoned a~;ain. Thc. t\ttorney repl~i.ed that the Ci.ty could pl.ace a covenant on the property, but a covenant can always be chan~;ed. Mr. Concaay oE ]lurlce Lane stated t.hat the residents of 33urlce Lane are wilting to geC together w:i.th Mr, Lee. Mr. Lee did not Chi.nlc there was suf.f.i.ci.ent time atter Christmas t.o get a resolution together Eor approv~l of his ~i.ndustria7. bonds. Lee agai.n asked if ]~e could get some sort of approval toni.ght:. P1r. Pahey stated tk~at he ~.vas not willi.ng to g~i.ve an approval. without a plan. 1~Ir< Pahey suggested that the reioni.ng r.equest be cleni.ede Pahey stateci that i.t is unforCUnate that the bonds wi.ll. not: be avail.able after the fisst of the year, but f.e7.t t1~at the Council must talce the ti.me and make an orderly deci.si.on on any compromise proposal. Mrs, Scal.ze telt that the publi.c liearing should be continuecl, to give Mr. T.ee an opporttarri.Cy to get: something together i.f i.t i.s possible. Mr. Fahey introduced the follocvin~; resol.uti.on and moved its adoption: Rti50LU'CION N0. S~E-1.2-571 - CLOSIiIG THE PUi3LIC }IPARING ON T}t~ I,ARRY L~E BEZONING PROPOSAL Page -8- MINUTES City Counci.l Dec< 18, 1984 Lee ?teroning The Lore~oinp, resol.uCion was dul.y secondecl by Mr.. torsUerg. (Cont.) Ayes (2) Pahey, Forsberg, Nayes (3) Scalze, Nard:ini, Hanson. Resolution denied. This resolution appears in Resolution T~oolc No. 11, Page h39. ~lr. rorsberg telt Y.hat any new plan shoul.d go bef:ore the Planni.ng Commission. 'Lhe Pl.anner pointed ouC that i.f: f.unding is the i.ssue, iC may be possible to use tax ~increment financing. Mr. Fahey sug~;ested thaC any ne~v plan shoiil.d also be reviewed by the Planner. Mrs. 7.och asked i.f: the majori.ty of. people were in favor of. a rezoning wi.thin 350 Leet, :if. the Council. had to abide by this, P1r.. 1'ahey r.eplied that this is not r.equi.red by the ordinance. Even :i.F ].00% were i.n f:avor. of: a rezoning, the Council. sti.11 had the freedom to malce the dec:is:i.on, ?4r. Lee sug~ested that r,he City continue the public heari_ng Lar• 60 days ~i.n order. Lor hi.m to ~;et the necessary plans together. Pir. P'ahey introduced the f.ollowi.n~; resolut:ion ancl moved i_CS adopC'ion: RFSOLUTION N0. 84-1.2-572 - COD!7'tNllZNG TI1F PUBLIC HEARING ON THE LARRY LEE RF,70NSNG RPQU~ST tJNTiI.~ '.CI-I~ P~,I3RUARY 27, 1985 COUNCIL MEBTING The foregoing resolution was cluly seconded Uy PRr. Ilanson. Ayes (5) Pahey, Hanson, Scalze, Nardini, I~orsberg. Nayes (0). Resol.ution declared ado~ted. This resolution appears in Resoluti.on I3oolc No. 11, Pa~;e 640. 10 Xorl<ton h.ir. Larry Lee appeared UeLore t}~e Cow,cil recuesti.ng f'i.nal note Court resol.ution approval in the amount of. $940,000 for ?_0 Yorkton Court, ~7ote ResoLuCion Agencla Mrs. Scalze i.ntroduced the f.ollowi.ng resoLuti.on and moved its adoption: Item No. 4~ RGSOLUTION N0. 84-12-573 - AUTHORIZING A PROJisCT UNDPR THl? MINNESOTA MUN~ICTPAI~ INDIJSTRIAL DEVELOPMrNT ACT AND TItE TSSUANCF OP COHMERC:[AL DEVFLOPMrNT REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE TtIE 1?1,20JI~;CT (BRPCKGNRSDGE ASSOCIATPS PROJI;CT) (10 YORICTON COIJRT) Page -9- r~T.NU1~rs Ci.Cy Counc~i.l. 1)ec. 1H, 1934 ?0 Yor(cton The toregoi.nfl resol.ution was du].y seconded by Mr. Forsberg. Court Ayes (5) Scalze, Porsber.g, Hanson, Narc.l,i.ni, P2hey. (Cont.) Nayes (0). Resol.uti.on declar.ed adopted. This resoluti.on appears i.n Resolut:ion Ilootc No. 11, Pages 641. thru 646. Dec. 26th As tk~ere is no further busi.ness, Counci.l f.elt that: the December 7_6 Council Council meetin~ could be cancelled. Meeti.n~ Mr. l~orsberg introduced the f:oll.owi.ng reso].ution and moved i.ts adopt:ion: Ap,enda Addition RESOLU'CION N0. 84-17_-574 - CANCELLING TIIG LAST n9EPTING IN DECEMRI:R The foregoing resol.ution was duly seconded by hlr. Flanson. Ayes (5) Porsbeeg, Hanson~ Nardi.nti, Scalze, I'ahey. Dlayes (0). ResoluCi.on declared adopted. This resol.uti.on appears in Resolution }3ook No. 11., Page 647. Ryan The Planner suggested that the Counci.l. consi.der declarinf; Ryan Industriat Industrial Parlc a PUD. The Planner reported Chat he is trying to woric wi.th the Parlc PUD businesses in the park to cl.ean-up thei s pr.operty and tY~:is ~oould preclude Proposal having to use the variance process for a lot of Che pr.oblems i.n the parlc. '['he Ci.ty could Yhen use the conditional use permit process to ha ndl.e these A~enda problems. Addi.tion The Planner reported that. the major~ity of the businesses i.n the park have been extremely cooperati.ve. Al.so, by the Ci.T.y's i.nitiaLing t:he PUD process, the businessrs would not have to pay a lot of fees for processing of variances. Mr. Fahey Lelt that the Ci.ty should geC the area in the best order it cari. The Planner also reported tliat he has been worl<ing on this matter during staff. hours. r4r. PorsUer.g di.d not feel Chat Luture devel.opments S.n the parlc shou7.d fa11. under the PUD. Mr. Pahey introduced the following re>olut~i.on and moved ~i.ts adoption: RESOLUTION N0. 84-1?_-575 - CALLING A PUBLIC tIEARLNG ON JANUARY 23, 1985 TO CONSIDER THE ~STAI3LISHMENT OP A PtID ZONE FOR RYAN'S INDUSTRIAL PARK Page -10- MtNU~rrs Ci.ty Council Dec. 18, 1984 Ryan Parlc 'Phe foregoi.ng resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Forsberg. PUD (Cont,) Ayes (5) Pahey~ Porsber~;, Scal.ze, Nard~in~i, Ilanson. Nayes (0). Resolution declared adopted. Thi.s resol.ution appears in Resoluti.on F3ook No. 11~ pa~e 648< Parl<s ~ P4rs, Scalze requested ttiat the cepital improvement funds for Parl<s Recreati_on and Recreation be carried over i.nto 19£3.5. B~dget Carry-Over, Mr. Ilanson introduced the f.ollowing resol.ut:i.on and moved its adoption: Agenda RF.SOLU7'ION N0. 84-12-576 - APPROVING TI{~ Addition IlUDGI?T CARIiY-0VER OP CAPITAL IMPROVEMI:NT FIINDS P'OR THE PAR1CS AND RECREATION BllDGPT 'CO 19t15 The foregoing resoluti.on was duly seconded by Mrs< Nar.di.ni.. Ayes (5) Hanson, Nardini., Pahey, liorsberg, Scalze. Nayes (0). Resoluti.on declared adapted. Ti~i.s resoluti.on apPear> in Resolution l~ook No. 11, Page 6~49. Frattalone The Ci.ty Attorney reported that Mr. FraCtalone wants to determine Road the location of Che road easement Chat he ~oi.ll be giving thc Ci.ty. Easement Mrs. Scalze stated that she feels Mr. rrattal.one should determ:i.ne cahere the easement i.s. Agenda Addition Mr. Pahey stated that he <tid noC car.e where the location of the easement was as Long as it was 50 feet wide and fronts to Ryan Dri.ve. Assessment 'Che City Attorney reported that Section 429 tells how to pre-pay Interest assessments. Mr. Sweeney reported that he does not know whether or ~larvin L,ee not P4arvin I.,ee has patid hi.s assessment. Agenda Mr. Scaeeney also reported that the City has the power to rebaCe Addition inCerest on assessments, but the Ci.Cy has not done tkiis in the past. The Clertc reported that the Ci.ty gets a receipt ~ahen assessments are pre-pa:id and the City has not received one f.or Mr. Lee who clai.ms he paid his assessments in Apri.l.. Mr. I'ahey sug~ested thaC the C~i.ty Attornc:y wri.te a letter to iQr, Lee and indi.cate that the City carinot rebaCe the i.nterest on his assessment as i_t has not done thi.s i.n the p~st and thi.s would be setti.ng a precedenC. The Attorney replied thaC he would do this. 1?age -11- MzNU~'rs c;cy c~u„~;~ i~e~. i~, i~~~~ School Board & City's Undeveloped Property Agenda Addition Mrs. Scalze reported that at a r.ecent School I3oard meeting Kr. Pahey indicated that the C.i.ty had no restidertCial property left to devel.op. `Sr. 1.'ahey repl.i,ed tliat he ~oas referring to huge Cr.lcts of resiclenti.al property. 24r. Porsberg disagreed that the City d~i.cl not have residenti.al. property yet: to develop. Mrs. Scalz.e explained thaC the School I3oard may have misi.nterpreter.l T4r. Paliey's comments and these commenCS coi11 be considered in thei.r decision to close schools in the. district. T4rs. Scalze suggested that the C:ity ~orite a letter to Che School. District ouCli.n:ing the number of resi.dential acres left to develop in the Ci.ty. T4r. Pahey stated that he w~ill to do. The Planner reported that he l~as this information on hand and wi.ll. get i.t to Mr. Fahey. Adjour.n r~r. itanson i.ntr.oduced the followi.ng resoluti.on and moved iCS a<topCi.on: A~;enda Item No. 5 R~SOLUTION N0. 34-12-577 - ADJOURNING 'Che for.egoin~; resolution was cluly seconded by Mr. Pahey. Ayes (5) Hanson, Tahey~ Scalze, Nard:ini, Porsberp. Nayes (0). Resoluti.on declared adop[ed. This resoluti.on appears i.n Resoluti.on Fiook No. 11, Page 650. Ther.e bein}; no further busi.ness, Che meeting was adjourned at F3:35 P.M. Respectf.ul.ly stabm:itCed, ,' /// ` ~', ~-~y~1 ,~,~~treC~.aC..- ~ % Kathleen Glanzer Recording Secretary Page -1?_- CITY OF LITTLE GANADA RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNES~TA ffice of: JOSEPH G. CHLEBECK, qerk 575 Little Canada Road Little Canada, Minn. 55177 484-2177 APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS DATE 12/31/84 We hereby authorize payment of vouchers: 15156-1527°j We hereby authorize payment of payroll: ~jj14-~~j9'~ ~ {~ (( Total k~xpense .~: ~~Za.~L;e. ° {~~~' c ~.~u\..'.i~ ~+19.chu e~ Fahey ~ Mayos ~,% ~ ~7 ;/-/ ~~=~ ~ ~ ~.,,~,~ ~~___ ~r~~.i~a~ ni:os~~a~x " Councilman -% ~ ~~ ~~ ~ - ~i ~~! , ~" ._ /s~ Beverly Sc 1 e Councilwo ~; ,,-- ~j ~r- r ~\..~. ~-~ ~ ~ .. /Y'~~-,,,r~ . ~~~n~~a co~xo~~ Councilman ~ ~ . '~,?"~ '- ' ~ / / / ~~'~.t.~ ,' G"( ( r'~l_.e-~~c.-_.- Councilwoman /. /G / ~ i ~.,- /?-~'i' / ~oseph hT~ebeck - Clerk MAYOR Raymontl Hanson COUNCI L Michael Fahey Beverly Scalze Dannis Forsberg Mugs Nardini ~39321,172,89 20,404.58 ~63, 3~+~ , 577. ~+7 `~.`°,;. CITY OF LITTLE CANADA PAYROLL DECEMBER 1984 3314 Larry Stenger 77.56 3315 Delane Powers 6.70 3316 Louis LaCasse 6.70 3317 Mary Forbes 6.70 3318 Lena Nadeau 6.70 3319 Virginia Sykes 6.70 3320 Elaine Waite 6.70 3321 Kris Greenside 186.45 3322 Steve Ullmann 51.10 3323 Pat Dunn 53.60 3324 Joseph Chlebeck 901.55 3325 Annette Freeman 604.33 3326 Dan Drake 43.58 3327 Void - 3328 Roger Glanzer 823.33 3329 Daniel Drake 607.52 3330 Joseph Steele 524.39 3331 Beverly Jespersen 514.03 3332 Grace Blesener 435.08 3333 Kris Greenside 168.30 3334 Kathy Glanzer 233.54 3335 Carl Spooner 92.00 3336 James Morelan 48.54 3337 M. St~ven Morelan 297.98 3338 John Fitzqerald 147.84 3339 Lowell Nagovsky 799.52 ToTAL FOR DEC. 12, 1984 6,650.44 3340 Joseph Chlebeck 901.55 3341 Annette Freeman 604.33 3342 Roger Glanzer 814.97 3343 Daniel Drake 592.27 3344 Joseph Steele 524.39 3345 Raymond Hanson 300.00 3346 Dennis Forsberg 225.00 3347 Mugs Nardini 225.00 3348 Bev Scalze 225.00 3349 Mike Pahey 225.00 3350 Johanna Gallaqher 130.00 3351 Don Tarnowski 100.00 3352 James Morelan 385.64 3353 voID - 3354 Diane Husak 1,566.91 3355 James Prudhomme 569.62 3356 Lowell Nagovsky 799.52 TOTAL FOR DEC. 28, 1984 8,189.20 PAYROLL DECEMBER~ 1984 PAGE 2 3357 ' ~ ~~~ Sana Greenside 10.05 3358 Kris Greenside 173.97 3359 Roger Glanzer 105.85 3360 Daniel Drake 56.50 3361 Daniel Drake 71.44 3362 Joseph Steele 143.72 3363 Beverly Jespersen 484.64 3364 Grace Blesener 369.10 3365 Kathy Glanzer 96.16 3366 Carl Spooner 115.00 3367 Carl Spooner 130.00 3368 Larry Stenger 134.94 3369 James Morelan 107.16 3370 Daniel Arcand 54.44 3371 Mark Graczyk 107.20 3372 Randal Graczyk 24.40 3373 David Moon 112.50 3374 Daniel Saiko 117.50 3375 Dennis Saiko 440.00 3376 Donald Saiko 160.21 3377 John Saiko 19.49 3378 Larry Saiko 268.80 3379 Bill Davison ~60.00 3380 Peter Costa 80.00 3381 Thomas Perlinger 110.00 3382 Sharon Timmons 90.00 3383 KarolyniKingsbury 120.00 3384 Art Herkenhoff 120.00 3385 Thomas Ducharme 110.00 3386 Roy French 70.00 3387 Eugene DeLonais 120.00 3388 Elaine Zoch 110.00 3389 william Sanders 120.00 3390 Lois Runyon 230.00 3391 Nick Kent 50.00 3392 Donald Cogan 102.18 3393 Jim Nelson 118.93 3394 Gary C1ark 95.48 3395 Lee Graczyk 77,7g 3396 David Blesener 125.00 3397 Jeff Nelson 322.50 TOTAL FOR DEC. 31, 1984 5,564.94 TOTAL FOR DECEMBER 20~404.58~ PAGE I CITY OF I,ITT~LE CANADA - VOUCHER3 - DECEMBER ~cg~} j~<'` c~ E`"` `J'` ``~ ~J ~ 5156 State Treasurer ~.. ~ ti ~ .2 ~ ~ /'1 Y > 1~;,;: (~ 29.83 1 5 1 5 7 S t a t e Treasurer~ Fica 879.89 15158 Washington Federal 743~000.00 Investment ~ 15~59 15160 Washington Federal Ramsey County i,eague 103,000.00 Investment 15161 First Bank State 12.30 1 80 529 15162 Commissioner of Revenue , . 00 9~+3 15163 Metro Waste Control Commission . 14,13~,20 ~5164 State Treasurer, PERA 610 21 15165 State Treasurer, FICA . 1 013.31 15166 1516q First Bank State Ramsey County League , 197r000,00 Investment 1516$ Northwestern Be11 Telephone 153.90 - 3g5.29 ~5~6g Ramsey County League 1z~3~ 15170 Publie Eynp].oyees Retirement Aasoc. 54,00 15171 15172 First Bank State University oY Minnesota 100~000,00 Investment 15173 Cricket Inn 90.00 61~38 ~517~ American Natinnal Savinds Bc Loan 442,658,30 Investment 15175 Rainbow Foods 35.33 15176 Lowell Nagovsky 163.00 ~5177 Lowell Nagovai~v. 208,50 15178 T. M. Sweeney ~+~978~78 15179 15180 T. M, Bweeney A tt ' 193•50 nne e F reeman 13.95 15181 Bev Jespersen 5 00 15182 Kris Greenside . ~~73 15~83 Northwestern Be11 20 70 ~ 1518~F Grace Blesener . 2~ 2~ 15185 M, W. Carley ~ 4 021 00 ~5186 Preas Publications , , 3~5,00 ~5187 Preas Publicatione 8~ 81 15188 ~5789 No. Hei.ghts Hdwe. Mik P ~ ~~3~~7 es ro Shop 45,00 15190 Fortmeyer ~t Lang ~~455~~~ 15191 Northwest Aasoe. 1,523.52 15192 Northwest Asaoc. 12.00 15193 Leef Brothere ~77 7~ 151~4 Anchor Paper ~ 85~54 15195 Garceau Hardware 2 237 8~ 15796 Sanders Bc Aasoe. ~ ~ ~~S~~Q ~5t97 ScientiPie International Reaearch 2l+9 ~~ ~5198 White Bear Animal Control ~ 339.00 ~5199 White Bear Furnace 133 00 15200 Battery & Tire Warehouae 0 45.26 15201 W, W, Grainger 1~6 08 152oz mruek Utilitiea . 9.35 15203 2om xorwath 300 00 15204 Ramaey County . 524 06 ~5205 xamsey county . 476 06 ~5206 M-R Signa . 26 572 152~7 Bellaire Sanitation . 645 00 15208 Little Canada Fire Department . 200 00 15209 j 15210 Washington Federal F . 622,170.22 Investment '' 15211 irat Bank State First Bank State 434t000.00 Investment 15212 Rnmaey County League 295,000.00 284.00 Inveatment 15213 Fortmeyer d: Lang 325.50 15z14 Void 15215 H+Qnchmark 1,20p,00 PAGE II CITY OF LI`TTLE CANADA - VOUCHER3 - DECEMk3ER 1984 15216 S& T OPfice Supplies 144.89 15217 Metro Sales 504.00 15218 _, Sandera & Assoc. g0.00 ~ 15219 Goprier sign 104,54 15220 Kath Brothers 1,061.g4 15221 Steichens 3p4,98 15222 Munteana 240.00 15223 Knox Lumber 146.87 15224 Kokesh vozD 15225 Precision Tree 5,362.25 15226 Gar Johnson 10.40 15227 First National Bank of St. Paul 66,229,00 15228 Firat National Bank of St. Paul 130,000.00 ~5229 First Natinnal Bank pf St. Paul 1,731.25 15230 First National Bank of 3t. Paul 20,094,10 ~5231 White Bear Aninaal Control 339000 ~5232 Ramsey CountY 4,go2.53 15233 American Water Works Assoe. 115.00 15234 Serco 8.00 15235 Bd of Water Co~isaionere 16,639.32 15236 Nimm, Wastewater Operators Assoc. 5.00 15237 Knox Lumber 123,97 15238 Ladder Gate Co. 472,88 15239 Metro Waste Control 15,634,93 1524o F. M, Frattalone 9.00 15241 Johanna Gallagher 202.21 15242 Poucher Printing 35~.9~ ~52~+3 Thompson Plumbing 20.00 ~ 15244 Roger Glanzer vozD 15245 State Treasurer, PERA 739.96 15246 State Treasurer, FICA ~,228,81 15247 State Treasurer, 30000 15248 North Heighta Hardware 122,73 152~+9 Bellaire Sanitation 795.00 15250 Executone 51.66 15251 Press Publicationa 297.03 15252 Northwest Asaoc. 1,275.~+5 15253 void ___~_ ~5254 McNamara 26,~55,00 15z55 Mn. Street Supt. Assoc. 15.00 15256 Mn. Pollution Control 90.00 1525? Northweatern Bell 57023 15258 Northern States Power 5,031.07 ~5259 Johanna Galagher 110.28 ~526o m. a. Sehifelq~ 36.50 1526t Long Lake Ford 3~5.02 15262 Mnox 35.74 15263 Quality susinesa 774.43 75264 Northweatern Bell 50.~5 t5265 Mn, Dept, of Tranaportation 5,p0 15266 Woto, Reardon, Tautgea & Co. j,824,5p 15267 Serco 8.00 15268 loseph Chlebeek 39.75 15z69 Leef Brothera 130.60 \ 15270 Kokesh volD ~ 15271 3teichena 100.26 15272 Board of Water Commieaionere 19,5pg,p5 15273 Press Publicatiians 375,00 Bonda Bonds Bonda Bonds Insurance PAGE III CITY OF LSTTLE CANADA - VOUCHERS - DECENIDER 198~+ 15274 Roger Glanzer 29,5p ~5275 Kokesh 684.04 15156 - 15275 Expense Vouchera ~3r3~5,312.02 3314 - 3397 Payroll 20.404.58 Total for December 1g84 ~3,325~716.60