Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/27/1982 Council Minutes1 24� September 27, 1982 The regular meeting of the Lino Lakes City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M., September 27, 1982, by Mayor Benson with all Council members present. Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Davidson, Mr. Kluegel, Mr. Schumacher, Mr. Volk and Mrs. Sarner were also present. MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 13, 1982 Mr. Marier moved to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Mr. Schumacher requested that the Formal Resolution approv- ing the sale of the bonds be included in these minutes. Motion carried unanimously. DISBURSEMENTS - SEPTEMBER 27, 1982 Mr. Kulaszewicz questioned the check for the Building Inspector for attendance at a seminar. Mr. Schumacher explained this is his recommenda- tion and the funds would be allocated from the administrative fund. Mayor Benson asked Mr. Kluegel if he felt the other Cities he works for would assist in the cost of this course, Mr. Kluegel said, he could ask. Mr. Marier felt the other communities should be contacted to share this expense. Mrs. Elsenpeter disagreed. She felt what Mr. Kluegel did after hours is his business and those communities should not be asked to share a cost. Mr. Schumacher explained his reasons for this recommendation. He felt this course would be beneficial to the Council as well as the Task Force, Planning and Zoning, etc. Mr. Reinert asked if the City has a training schedule for the employees? Mr. Schumacher said the basic classes are known at the beginning of the year and these are scheduled. However, there are some courses that come up that there is no previous knowledge and this is such a course. Mayor Benson questioned the Attorney's statement - is the City staying pretty well within the guidelines of the contract? Does this compare with previous legal expenses? Mr. Schumacher said all consultants are over budget - as to Mr. Hawkins he did not have those figures at hand. Mr. Reinert moved to approve the disbursements as presented. Seconded by Mrs. Elsenpeter. Motion carried with Mr. Marier voting, Mo. OPEN MIKE Mr. DuFour was scheduled but he was not present. This will be handled later in the agenda when Mr. DuFour is present. ANFINSON HENDRICKSON - 1982 AUDIT I Mr. Schumacher reported that a letter of intent from the Auditor's had been received setting the 1982 audit costs at $8300.00 44 September 27, 1982 Mayor Benson asked how this figure compares with other communities? Mr. Schumacher said that is hard to do in that each community has different auditing requirements Mayor Benson said he was interested in how this figure would compare with what other Auditors would charge this City. Would the fact that they have experience with the City's bookkeeping system make their charges less? Mr. Schumacher felt the fact that Anfinson was familar with the City's system, would definitely take less time. HE felt that an Auditor might subsidize the first year anticipating being here several years and making up for the first year's loss in subsequent years. Mr. Schumacher pointed out the advantages and disadvantages of having a different auditor. Mr. Reinert was concerend with the open ended cost figures. He asked if this was put out on bids, would there be favorable bids? Mr. Schumacher felt that this would be true. Mr. Reinert assed the Attorney if this could be done by obtaining quotes and Mr. Hawkins said, Yes. Mr. Kulaszewicz disagreed - he felt more comfortable with someone he's familar with. Mr. Marier agreed with MR. Reinert. Mr. Reinert moved that the City contact no less than eight and no more than twelve, bring a list of these auditors along with their estimated cost for the Council to look at. Mr. Marier suggested a RFP be supplied and Mr. Reinert agreed. Mr. Marier seconded the motion. Mayor Benson asked when is the Auditor usually appointed for the next fiscal year? Is this early or late? Will it make a difference to the timing of the audit? Mr. Schumacher noted that this is one area where our present Auditor would, be an advantage for the City. The firm does some preliminary work in December and are in the offices as soon as the books are closed. With someone new, you would probably be on a list and in the order of when the firm was accepted. Mayor Benson asked if there had been substantial difference between the estimated cost and the actual cost and Mr Schumacher said, No. Mr. Reinert suggested asking for a time frame as to when the firm could do this City's 1982 audit. On calling for the vote, the Motion carried with Mr. Kulaszewicz and Mayor Benson voting, No. SUMMER RECREATION REPORT - CENTENNIAL SCHOOL - CLIFF HOLMAN Mr. Holman presented the Council with a report on the activities and the costs of the summer recreation program that hasjust been completed. Mr. Holman noted on the last three pages, the statistics for the past three years have been compiled. He also reported that three progrsms had been removed from the summer recreation program and put into the summher school program. Enrollment is down and Mr. Holman felt this is due to the economy. This program is very limited as to revenues. This was explained noting that in order to maintain the program a registration must be charged and the five cities in the district also assists with revenues. 1 September 27, 1982 Mr. Holamn presented the expenditures in connection with this program making a note of the fact that some $16,000.00 received in the form of CETA assistance personnel is not included in this figure. Mr. Holman noted that this program is in financial trouble and he realized that the City!s are also having their financial problems, but he would request that the City look for funds that could be given to this program. Mayor Benson thanked Mr. Holman for this time and reformation and said the Council would be getting back to him. CORPS OF ENGINEER REPRESENTATIVE Mr. Tim Fell, Representative of the Corps of Engineers was present to dis- cuss the problem of the undevelopable lots in Lakes Addition #2 and the possibility of making those lots buildable. Mr. Schumacher explained the sequence of events that led to this problem. Mr. Schumacher asked how property that was platted and recorded in 1970/71 and did not come under the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers until sometime around 1975 or so - why are these lots not grandfathered in? how does the Corps of Engineers have jurisdiction over lots already designated for residential usage? Mr. Fell explained that the authoritt} to control the wet lands was given to the Corps of Engineers in 1977 and their rules apply for the usage as of the date the permit is applied for - not when the land was platted. MR. Fell explained the pros and cons used in considering a permit for the placing of fill in a wetland. There was reference to S &J Construction and their application to fill in wet and adjacent to these lots with Mr. Fell saying that a compromise had been worked out. Mr. Schumacher asked if this was a possibility with the lots that are designated as unbuildable? and Mr. Fell said there is always a possiblility of a compromise. All things are taken into considera- tion when an application is received. He explained some of the different areas of consideration when an application is reviewed. Mr. Reinert asked if there would be consideration of the amount of lands that are already in public ownership in the area? Mr. Fell said he did not know what was feasible in this area, it would have to be inspected. Mr. Reinert asked, if the fact that this area is sewered would have a plus effect on any consideration? Mr. Fell felt that the fact that the City has already spent money to provide sewers in this area would be a plus factor. Mr. Fell listed the areas that would be considered in such a permit application noting that the fact that the City does have investments in that area would be one of the considerations. The general consensus of the Council was that Mr. Schumacher and Mr. David- son work with Mr. Fell in putting together an application for this area. A recess was called at this point in the meeting - 8:10 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:20 P.M. X43 September 27, 1982 STATE ADI ROAD SYSTEM - MR. VAN WORMER Mr. Van Wormer presented the report on the manner in which the street to be designated as the City's State Aid Road System was selected. He reported that this list had been prepared with the assistance of Mr. Volk and Mr. Davidson. The streets are also listed in the manner of priority. MR. Van Wormer went through the list of suggested streets explaining the reasons why this particular street was chosen. He noted that the nine streets listed would use approximately 13.5 miles of street and the allocation for the City is 13.5. Mr. Van Wormer pointed out there were four other streets considered but there were some problems with those streets. Mr. Van Wormer pointed out that these are strictly recommendations and can be changed. Mr. Weible asked where the money for these roads would be obtained? how much would it cost the taxpayer? MR. Van Wormer explained this is money from a State Fund and there is no cost to the City. He explained the only strings attached is the streets must be constructed to State specifications. Mr. Reinert moved to adopt Resolution 82 -17, designating the Municipal State Aid Road System. Seconded by MR. Marier. Motion carried un- animously. By general consensus the Council waived the reading of this Resolution. Mr. Marier moved to adopt Resolution 82 -18, setting the priority for the Captial Improvement Program. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT - BLACK DUCK Mr. Schumacher reviewed the discussion at the last Council meeting of reallocating the assessments due on the eight undevelopable lots over the enure project. There was also discussion on delaying this action for one year. However, Mr. Schumacher noted that the City does no_:hAve the ability to recertify this assessment to include the percentage in- crease up to the amount of 13 %. Springsted had suggested the figure of 11.25% and this would accumulate approximately $60,000.00 over the life of the bond issue. He felt this, coupled with the penalties and interest, should make up this loss to the City. Mr. Schumacher also noted that this must be decided at this meeting due to the fact that the certifica- tion must be in the County Auditor's office by the 10th of October. If it is not approved at this meeting, this will cause a one year delay in the certification. Mr. Marier asked if this could be passed with stipulations and Mr. Schumacher said he did not think so and asked MR. Hawkins. Mr. Hawkins said the Resolution must be passed and the reasses sment be adopted. Mr. Reinert moved to adopt the recommendations of Springsted and re- certify this project at the interest rate of 11.25 %. Seconded by Mr. Marier. Motion carried unanimously. • 1 247 September 27] 2982 Mr. Schumacher requested Mr. Hawkins to put this in a formal Resolution form. PLANNING AND ZONING ACTIONS Nathe Rezone - Mr. Kluegel reviewed the action to date on this rezone. The Planning and Zoning had reviewed this as reqlkecsted by the Council and had recommended that basically, if the 4 -plex is to be allowed, then no parking from the 49 Club be allowed on that lot and if parking is to be allowed, then the building should be turned into a motel. Mr. Reinert asked what this does to the parking of this is turned into a motel and Mr. Kluegel said there needs to be 10 units to be classified as a motel. Mr. Reinert felt this would only compound the problem and this did nothing to solve this problem. Mr. Marier asked where the figure of 10 came from and Mr. Kluegel said Ordinance #56 does not have a motel classification but does limit hotels to 10 units. He said qunderthe State Building Code a motel is referenced back to a hotel and this requires 6 units. Mr. Reinert disagreed with this concept - this solves nothing and only compounds the existing problems. Mr. Worth, Mr. Nathe's Attorney, said Mr. Nathe had abandonded the idea of the extra parking. He just wanted the rezoning so he can get the building finished and recoup some of his investment. Mr. Reinert asked what the required parking for a business such as the 49 Club was - is there adequate parking? 1 Mr. Kluegel said this is an old existing business and the growth in the number of patrons has exceeded the parking available. Mr. Reinert felt that parking is a problem that Mr. Nathe must solve and if he is to have parking, then he cannot have the 4 —plex - if he wants the 4 -p1ex, then he cannot have the parking. These are conflicting land uses. He felt that the Council can allow either the 4 -plex or the park- ing and if the 4 -plex is allowed, then Mr. Nathe must come in with some additional parking someplace else. Mrs. Elsenpeter said she was trying to get ttb straight in her mind why both operations cannot be allowed - is it because of parking? Is is because of the zoning? She was told it was because of the zoning. Mrs. Elsenpeter pointed out that the Ordinance does not say that you . can:fltr; have a parking lot in an R3 zone. If it does, she can't find it. Mr. Hawkins said he could not find anyplace were commercial parking in an R3 zone is not allowed. He felt that a parking problem exists and this is a way of solving that problem. Mr. Schumacher pointed out that one of Mr. McLean's major concers was the limited frontage on the street. This lot only has some 54' of frontage and if that is used as a parking lot, then the frontage becomes the width of the driveway. Mr. Worth pointed out that required frontage usually is established to )48 September 27, 1982 maintain a distance netween houses. On the West side of this lot there is a 100' wide St. Paul Water Works easement, which creates this distance, even though it is not under Mr. Nathe's ownership. Mr. Hawkins said there was nothing in the Ordinance that does not allow commercial parking in an R3 zone. He said he didn't know if that was a good policy, but that is what the ordinance says. Mr. Reinert had some questions as to the footage in certain areas on the map and he asked Mr. Goldade if this had been discussed at the P &Z.(Mr. Goldade answered by he could not be understood.) After some discussion on the alternatives to solving this parking problem, Mr. Reinert moved that Mr. Schumacher meet with the owner and work out details to implement suggestions from the Council at this meeting and return at the October 12, 1982 Council meeting. Seconded by MRs. Eisen- ;Deter. Motion carried unanimously. Ernst - Variance to minimum house size - Planning and Zoning had re- commended approval of the adminstrative variance. Mr. Marier said he had no problems with the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board, however, he suggested these types of problems be watched closely in the future. Mr. Marier moved to approve the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning for the granting of the variance due to an error in the cal- culation of the square footage by the Building Inspector. Seconded by MR. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried with Mr. Reinert voting, No. Variance - Klolstad /Nelson - Sherwood Green - The Planning and Zoning had recommended the variance to the boulevard slope in this plat due to the lay of the land and to preserve some very large trees. Mr. Marier moved to approve the Planning and Zoning recommendation to in- clude the Engineer's recommendation on the drainage. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. Moris - Side yard setback - This deals with a garage slab ening in stalled too near the side yard on an unimporved street. MR. Moris can extend the slab for 10', this will put the slab within 3' of his well. This slab had originally been poured without a building permit. 1 Mr. Moris told the Council the same story he had related to the Planning and Zoning- that he had been told he could put his garage 15' from the center of the street. He also was never told that he needed a building permit to construct the slab. He only was told that he eeded the permit for the slab when he went to get a permit for the garage. Mrs. Elsenpeter pointed out that Mr. Moris is using the proposed street as a driveway and the fence goes to the end of the street. The garage is pisitioned so that they will enter off the proposed street. Mr. Marier moved to grant the variance. Seconded by MR. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Reinert referred to Mr. Prokop's motion in the Planning and Zoning Board's minutes as to the problem of misinformation being given out by staff members in the office. Mr. Reinert moved that Mr. Schumacher look into this and report back to the Council. Seconded by MR. Marier. Mayor Benson asked about the envelopes that were to be prepared - what is the status of those envelopes" He asked that the envelopes be completed 1 1 1 September 27, 1982 as soon as possible. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Moris asked if there isn't something that the developer could put together to give to new home owners? Mrs.Elsenpeter suggested a "home owners" packet being put together to be given to the home owners at the time an occupation permit is issued. Mayor Benson asked that be put into a motion. Mrs. Elsenpeter ,so moved and volunteered to put the necessary information together. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. CLERK's REPORT The Clerk presented an application for an On -Sale 3.2% Beer Permit for Z's Pizza. Mr. Hawkins had checked the insurance and all is in order. Mr. Marier moved to approve a 3.2% beer On -sale License for Z's Pizza. Seconded by Mrs. Elsenpeter. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Marier moved to approve a Cigarette License for Z's Pizza. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. The Clerk presented a request from a Service man to extend the storage of an unlicensed car for te�1engh of his term in the service. Mr. Marier moved to approve. Seconded by MR. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. ATTORNEY's REPORT Mr. Hawkins had no specific report. ENGINEER's REPORT Baldwin Lake Mobile Home Court Sewer - Mayor Benson noted that Mr. Paul Howard is out of town and would like to table this until the next meeting. Mr. Marier moved to table this consideration until Oct. 12, 1982. Second- ed by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. Feasibility Cost - Country Lakes Park - Mr. Davidson reported that he bad met with the Park Board and the schedule he had prepared for the construct- ion had been approved by the Park Board. The estimated costs of doing the soil work is between $2600.00 and $3000.00. This is necessary before any of the planning for the construction can begin. Mr. Davidson reported the feasibility study costs would be $4,400.00 from his firm. Mr. Marier asked if the Park Board had looked into where the County was to build their beaches? The County beach is on the West shore of Cen- terville Lake. Mr. Marier asked how far away that beach is from the one the City is proposing? Mr. Reinert asked about the maintenance of this park - has anyone dis- cussed the additional cost for the maintenance? Mr. Reinert felt this factor should be considered. Mr. Kulaszewicz moved to approve the feasibility study on Country Lakes Park not to exceed $4400.00. Seconded by Mrs. Elsenpeter. Motion carried unanimously. BIDS - TRUCK EQUIPMENT Mr. Volk presented the results of bids for the dump body and snow plowing J5Q September 27, 1982 equipment for the 32,000 GWV truck. Mr. Marier moved to approve the bid from Midland Equipment Company for $15,235.00. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Volk presented some information on the side mount mower for the tractor that was purchased. He noted that he is $12,000.00 under budget for the planned purchases for this year. HE noted there will be 10% price increase on the mower, therefore, he would ask that the pre- viously low bid on this side mower be accepted at this time. Mr. Marier moved to accept the bid on the side mower with the City personnel to install. Seconded by Mr. Reinert. Motion carried unanimously. DELINQUENT UTILITIES - CERTIFY TO AUDITOR The Clerk presented a list of past due utilities and asked Council approval to certify these to the County Auditor for collection, noting that three persons on the list have paid in full. Mrs. Elsenpeter moved to authorize the Clerk to certify the past due utilities to the County Auditor for collection on property taxes. Seconded by Mr. Marier Motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING 1983 LEVY Mr. Schumacher reported that this is the levy that had been discussed at the budget meeting and this is approximately a # mil decrease. Mrs. Elsenpeter moved to adopt Resolution 82 -19 adopting the levy as proposed by the City Administrator in the amount of $580,202.00 and waive the reading of the Resolution. Seconded by Mr. Reinert. Motion carried with Mr. Marier voting, No. OLD BUSINESS Closing a portion of East Shadow Lake Drive - Mr. Schumacher listed the reasons for this consideration and discussed the reasons why Lantern Lane should be kept open this winter. After some discussion on this matter, Mr. Marier moved to table. Seconded by Mr. Reinert. Motion carried unanimously. Abatement Committee Report - Mr. Schumacher has been attending these meetings and gave a brief -report on what this is all about. The County must have plans for landfill sites and how there are to be handled. There will be more on this. Mrs. Elsenpeter moved to consider the i ;utility rates and was told this will be on the October 12, 1982 agenda. The motion was withdrawn. 1 1 The Clerk made' note that the next Council meeting will he held on Tuesday, October 12, 1982 due to the Holiday on the regular meeting night of the llth. NEW BUSINESS RESOLUTION UPGRADING COUNTY ROAD 14 Mrs. Elsenpter presented her reasons for the passageo'f`this Resolution. 1 1 September 27, 1982 and moved to approve Resolution #82 -20. Seconded by Mr. Reinert. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Benson noted that the candidates will be in City Hall on Thursday, October 7, 1982 for discussion with the Council. Mr. Schumacher asked if a budget meeting could also be set for that date. It was agreed by the Council that a budget meeting will be held at 3:00 P.M. on October 7, 1982 at the Lino Lakes City Hall. Mr. Schumacher presented the concerns of the Planning and Zoning Board in reference to having strong communications lines between the Planning and Zoning and the Council. They have offered to have a member of the Planning and Zoning Board present at Council meetings. Mr. Marier moved to adjourn at 11:00 P.M. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Aye. These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at a regular meeting held on October 12, 1982. Edna L. Sarner, Clerk - Treasurer October 12, 1982 The regular meeting of the Lino Lakes City Council was called to order at 7:05 P.M., October 12, 1982 by Mayor Benson with all members present except Mr. Marier. Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Schumacher, Mr. Kluegel, Chief Myhre, Mr. Volk and the Clerk were also present. MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 27, 1982 Mrs. Elsenpeter moved to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Mayor Benson asked if the City had looked into Mr. Holman's request for funds and Mr. Schumacher said this should be done at a budget hearing. Motion carried unanimously. DISBURSEMENTS - September 30, 1982 - October 12, 1982 Mrs. Elsenpeter moved to approve the Disbursements of September 30, 1982 as presented. Seconded by Mr. Kulaszewicz. Motion carried unanimously. The Clerk noted that a bill had been listed twice under the Public Works and gave the correct figures for the October 12, 1982 disbursements. Mr. Kulaszewicz moved to approve the disbursements with the correction. Seconded by Mr. Reinert. Motion carried unanimously. OPEN MIKE