Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-02-07 CCMCity of Lake Elmo 3800 Laverne Avenue North October 2, 2007 7 PM REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA A. CALL TO ORDER: B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C. ATTENDANCE: —Johnston, DeLapp, Johnson, Park, _Smith D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: E. ORDER OF BUSINESS: F. GROUND RULES: G. APPROVE MINUTES for meeting of September 18, 2007 and September 21, 2007: H. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES: Meeting attendees wishing to address the city council on any items NOT on the regular agenda may speak for up to three minutes. I. CONSENT AGENDA: Items are on the on the consent agenda because they are routine business and are not for discussion. 2. Approve Resolution no. 2007-068 for claims 3. Accept resignation from Jenifer Watters, Park Commission 4a. Northern Watermain Extension Change Order No. 1 b. Northern Watermain Extension Compensating Change Order No.2 and Payment Certificate No. 3 (Final) c. Resolution No. 2007-069 for Final Acceptance of the Northern Watermain Extension Project 5. Approve purchase of replacement personal computers fll���II]��Lti�► 91 6. Consider appointment of Jennifer Rasmussen to the Community Improvement Commission 7. Consider application for a Conditional Use Permit from HAIRitage `Hous to allow therapeutic massage as a component of the full service salon currently located at 9242 Hudson Blvd. Suite 3; Resolution No. 2007-070. 8. Consider application for a Master Plan Amendment from the Carmelite Monastery to amend the approved Master Plan for the site to add an accessory structure; PF Zoning; Resolution No. 2007-071. 9. Consider application for a Conditional Use Permit amendment and variances for expanded parking at 11530 Hudson Boulevard N.; Resolution No. 2007- 072 10. Report on Lake Elmo School Safety Meeting and next steps K. REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: (These are verbal updates and do not have to be added to the agenda.) Mayor and Council Members Administrator - October 9th: Workshop Consider PCA agreement for superfund site cleanup - Update on Keats/Lake Elmo Avenue Design Review Committee City Clerk - October 1 It", 7 p.m., Fire Hall: Assessment Hearings for 2006 MSA Resurfacing Project, 2006 Overlays Project and 2006 MSA Resurfacing Project L. ADJOURN: Lake Elmo City Council Meeting WELCOME If you wish to address the city the city clerk or the city administrator. l' Please fill in the form an the it to You may address the city The mayor will call upon council for up to 3 minutes. time designated for public commentsOU when it on for you y � speak during the _ each aa� da 't Name 1llihat item # and topic /- A 41� r em. Of your topic is not a numbered on the agenda, it Will beginning of the meeting under public comments i heard the and inquiries). Lak'S F-l-Ino Guth" �uc�ciG is eeting WELCOME { mrr vArish tc, address the cit�' cstr r�cii5 P6eas,E� �`ait in ti�e 10o� if: a� i`ry Glee ®rie�i, i� city council for UP ass � or OU to �.S'ak during the a addr-eSs ca-@i uper`r, You �hett it is Time ��r C h,e rnaY, Or 114tli Sri iic car s arts cap sac acid item' time ciesianalted for P $ Name Iq Address � ��d tag�ic � I �t the teat item agenda, VC vviii be i ear d glad on ui6c-sl- (if �Seaur- topic i� ��i ���a��nder Public co„n��9r��.s �nc� ira�, MINUTES APPROVED: October 16, 2007 City of Lake Elmo City Council Meeting Minutes October 2, 2007 Mayor Johnston called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Everyone joined in the Pledge of Allegiance. Present: Mayor Johnston, Council Members DeLapp, Johnson, Park and Smith. Also Present: City Administrator Hoyt, Finance Director Bouthilet, City Attorney John Miller, Senior Planner Gozola, City Engineer Griffin, and City Clerk Lumby. Approval of Agenda: Motion: Council Member Johnson moved approval of the October 2„ 2007 agenda, as amended with moving agenda item 9 up to the item 7 time slot. Council Member DeLapp seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Johnston reviewed the City Council adopted ground rules and order of business. Approval of the September 4, 2007 minutes: The September 4, 2007 minutes were accepted with amendments by consensus. Approval of the September 21, 2007 minutes: The September 21, 2007 minutes were accepted by consensus. PUBLIC COMMENTS/INQUIRIES: Richard Travers, 2151 Lake Elmo Avenue N., read several issues from a powerpoint presentation summarized from the September 11, 2007 People Preserving Lake Elmo, (PeoPLE) meeting, Gust Kempf, 2685 Lake Elmo Avenue N., continued reading the issues from the PowerPoint presentation from the September 11, 2007 People Preserving Lake Elmo (PeoPLE) meeting. Todd Williams, 3025 Lake Elmo Avenue N., explained that the fifteen issues being presented from the September 11, 2007 meeting were a consensus of the members of PeoPLE who had met after the September 11 meeting. He requested a written response to the fifteen issues be delivered to him by November 2 and requested that the council issue a report and read it into the minutes of the November 5"' Council meeting. (Power Point slide presentation is attached) LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 2, 2007 Mayor Johnston explained that he had requested a copy of the September 11, 2007 videotape from Mr. Williams. Mr. Williams explained that the group did not receive a videotape of the entire meeting due to technical difficulties so the PeoPLE group wrote down their issues. Mayor Johnston told residents that the City will hold a public meeting at Oak -Land Jr. H.S, at 7 pm, October 18th to describe the engineering work done on the I-94 to 30th Street Infrastructure project. The City Council will have a workshop on October 30 for the City Council members to learn about and ask questions on financing options. Susan Dunn, 11018 Upper 33`d Street, completed reading the presentation of the September 11, 2007 PeoPLE issues. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion: Council Member Johnson moved to approve the consent agenda as identified. Council Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. • Approve resolution no. 2007-068 for claims • Accept resignation from Jenifer Watters, Park Commission • Northern Watermain Extension Change Order No. I • Northern Watermain Extension Compensating Change Order No. 2 and Payment Certificate No. 3 (Final) • Resolution No.2007-069 for Final Acceptance of the Northern Watermain Extension Project • Approve purchase of replacement personal computers in the amount of $17,687.70 REGULAR AGENDA: Consider appointment of Jennifer Rasmussen to the Community Improvement Commission Motion: Council Member Johnson moved to appoint Jennifer Rasmussen, 535 Cimarron, to a two-year term on the Community Improvement Commission, Council Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Consider application for a Conditional Use Permit amendment and variances for expanded parking at 11530 IIudson Boulevard N.: Resolution No. 2007-072 Ben Gozola, Senior Planner reported the City Council is being asked to consider a conditional use permit amendment and three variances to allow the expansion of Laidlaw Bus transit facility currently located at 11530 Hudson Boulevard. The property is zoned agricultural and the Laidlaw bus operation is currently authorized by a low impact non - LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 2, 2007 agricultural use CUP approved in 2002. The proposed expansion would add approximately 1.07 acres to the CUP site to accommodate 23 additional buses an employee parking needs. When Terry Emerson was asked if there was a sense of urgency, be said Laidlaw would like to get this done before the ground freezes up. He said Laidlaw Bus Company asked for the changes so that all the company's buses could be plugged in during winter. If this request does not get approved, he would be interested in an interim use. The Council asked the Planning Commission at its October 22nd meeting, guide staff in preparing an interim use ordinance that would allow the City to grant interim use permits. Motion: Council Member DeLapp moved to approve Resolution No. 2007-072, denying a Conditional Use Permit Amendment and three variances to allow E&E Properties LLC to expand the existing Laidlaw Bus Transit facility on property at 11530 Hudson Boulevard because the hardship criteria are not met. Council Member Smith seconded the motion. Mayor Johnston and Council Members Johnson, DeLapp and Smith voted for the motion with Council Member Park voting against. Consider application for a Conditional Use Permit from HAIRitage `Hous to allow therapeutic massage as component of the full service salon currently located at 9242 Hudson Blvd, Suite 3, Resolution No. 2007-070 Ben Gozola, Senior Planner reported the City Council is being asked to allow therapeutic massage by conditional use permit at the HAIRitage'Hous salon. The Planning Commission and staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit for therapeutic massage because the applicant had demonstrated that the conditions for a CUP had been met. Motion: Council Member Johnson moved to adopt Resolution No. 2007-070 approving the conditional use permit for massage services a t 9242 Hudson Boulevard based upon the following findings.• 1. The use would not negatively affect the health, safety, morals, convenience, or general welfare of surrounding lands.; 2. It would not affect traffic or parking conditions given the use has existed on the site for one year and no complaints were received.; 3. The use would have little or no effect on utility or school capacities; 4. The proposed use would have no effect on property values ofsurrounding land;, 5. The use would be consistent wit the Comprehensive Plan; subject to the following condition that therapeutic massage be performed only in conjunction with a formal salon or spa. Council Member DeLapp seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 2, 2007 Consider application for a Master Plan Amendment from the Carmelite Monastery to amend the approve Master Plan forth site to add an accessory structure; PT Zoning; Resolution No. 2007-071 Ben Gozola, Senior Planner reported the City Council is being asked to allow a master plan amendment to permit an additional accessory building at the Carmelite Monastery of the Blessed Virgin Mary at 8248 DeMontreville Trail. The Planning Commission and staff recommended option 1, approval of the master plan amendment to allow an additional accessory building with the following conditions: 1. The proposed structure must meet applicable setback requirements; and 2. The septic system for the proposed structure would need to met all applicable requirements. The Planner noted that the concern from a member of the Jesuit Retreat Center regarding the shared driveway is not a city issue. Motion: Council Member Johnson moved to adopt Resolution No. 200 7-0 71 approving a master plan amendment for an accessory building at 8249 DeMontreville Trail based upon the following findings: 1. Given the size of the property and the distance to adjacent neighbors, the impacts to neighbors would be minimal and 2. The request for an additional storage and work space may be reasonable given the use of the property, subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed structure must meet applicable setback requirements and 2. The septic system for the proposed structure would need to meet all applicable requirements. Council Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Report on Lake Elmo School Safety Meeting and next steps. Susan Hoyt, City Administrator, reported the City Council is being asked to receive a report on the Lake Elmo Elementary School safety meeting that was held on Tuesday, September 25, 2007. The discussion covered three areas: speed, safe routes to school grant, and school drop off and pickup. Jennifer Pelletier, resident and PTA member, thanked Administrator Hoyt and City Engineer Griffin for setting up this safety meeting and for all the work they have accomplished in regard to a school safety zone. Motion: Council Member Johnson moved to endorse the staff to provide information and assistance where appropriate to the 9834 school district, Washington County and MnDOT on the school speed zone and other safety issues. Council Member DeLapp seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor and Council Members o Council Member Johnson encouraged citizens to attend the October 18th and 30`h meetings to be informed. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 2, 2007 o Council Member DeLapp reminded the council that the Keats Avenue people are having traffic problems. He noted that the house on 31 st is flooded with a foot of water and has become an absolute eye sore. Mayor Johnston voiced his concern with PowerPoint presentations during public inquiries and staff should be notified three days ahead of time so such presentations could be added to the council agenda and then all citizens could be informed of future agenda items. Discussion on what the council expects from people inquiry process at business meetings will be added to the October 9th workshop agenda, Administrator o On October 9th there will be a workshop to consider the PCA agreement for superfund site cleanup. A Council meeting will be held earlier before the workshop on October 9th to discuss allowing the installation of an underground horizontal well under the VFW Park. o Update on Highway 36/Lake Elmo Avenue Design Review Committee. Letters have been sent out to citizens and business owners have been contacted about an opportunity to participate in a transportation committee for the Highway 36 and Lake Elmo Avenue interchange. At the October 16th Council meeting there will be a report on engineering information on I-94 to 300' Street Infrastructure Project. On October 18th there will be a public meeting at Oakland Jr. H.S. with same engineering information. On October30th there will be a city council workshop on financial policies, Ben Gozola, Senior Planner, reported staff has completed an update to the City's official zoning map, the internal review of building permits now includes review by the planning department for compliance to zoning regulations and the planning department is actively pursuing multiple complaints and enforcement issues, Jack Griffin, City Engineer reported he has provided an update on the Tablyn Park Water main Extension project letting the Council know that that the project was nearly complete and that the construction costs were within the budget provided to 3M earlier in the summer. He also mentioned that there were three additional wells to be sealed as identified by the MDH and they would proceed with this additional work since they were within budget, Council Member Smith left the meeting at 9:05 p.m. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 2, 2007 The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 9:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Sharon Lumby, City Clerk Resolution no. 2007-068 claims Resolution no, 2007-069 Final Acceptance of the Northern Water main Extension Project Resolution no. 2007-070 Approve Conditional Use Permit for massage services at 9242 Hudson Boulevard Resolution no. 2007-071 Approve master plan amendment for accessory building at 8249 DeMontreville Trail Resolution no. 2007-072 Deny Conditional Use Permit Amendment and 3 variances to allow E&E Properties to expand the existing Laidlaw Bus Transit facility, 11530 Hudson LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 2, 2007 6 Issue #1 Manning Avenue route from 1-94 to Reid Park. — Could connect with gravity trunk already planned for south of 10th St — No real analysis of design and costs done yet, especially including this connection — The cost comparison should be between a single line down Manning Ave vs the line down Lake Elmo Ave PLUS the trunk from 10th St south along Manning Ave. — Such a route could serve the airport and Oakland Jr. HS, even though the JHS would not count against the RECs. — Council members' comments about "problems", because some of the ROW along Manning Ave is in West Lakeland, are NOT correct. A check with Wash. Co. revealed that Wash. Co. owns fee title to almost all the Manning Ave ROW. They own deeded easements to the rest. Wash. Co. requires only a simple design review and permit for construction oversight (such as silt fences) for Lake Elmo to get permission to put in sewer. Issue #2 Why does the Comp Plan show business park development around Oakland Jr High, when that is a perfect place for high density residential development? The kids could walk to school! If that gravity trunk along Manning Ave were installed now, it could serve at least 100s of residential RECs right away in that area. Issue #3 • Resolve all the different numbers existing for how many new and existing connections are expected in the Old Village. MOU says 500 new with 1000 total — Comp Plan says 600 in one place and 1100 in another — Mayor said at a Council meeting 850 new and 250 existing — DeLapp says only 125 existing in OV — Sewer trunk capacity is 3000 — Smith said 1725 units of those 3000 were reserved for future needs. We could NOT find this number in the Comp Plan. Issue #4 Comp Plan says no existing homes (unless there is a health problem) will be forced to connect, yet Chapter 7 of the City Code says (Sec. 705.03) that anyone adjacent to a sewer main MUST connect within one year of availability. Metro Council can force connections by State law. Please resolve these discrepancies. Issue #5 Even if existing homes somehow are not forced to connect, what is the City's policy on assessing those properties? We know a workshop is planned for Oct. 30 to discuss financing, but why does the Council not formulate a finance -independent policy on this issue, since we know the situation will arise? Issue #6 How will the City apportion the project costs between abutting properties and "future development fees"? Does the Council understand that any costs not assessed now will be put onto the general tax roles until future assessments actually do occur? Issue #7 • Has the Council consulted with other nearby cities to see what have been typical assessments for similar projects? • We know that is not a basis for assessing, but it gives us all an idea of what we might expect. • For example, Mahtomedi Council minutes from May 1, 2007 list two people complaining about $31,000 and $40,000 costs. Issue #8 What about the large developers in the Old Village? How much are they willing to pay for the trunk, as opposed to paying for the laterals? Mr. Bruggeman has said he will pay nothing. The developers' willingness must be factored into the final equation. Why not get the FACTS about their commitment now? Issue #9 What about the MOU requirement that any connected homes must have an average 3 units per acre or more in Old Village? What are the plans for rezoning existing neighborhoods? How else can the City comply with the MOU? Issue #10 When will the City perform a systematic survey of all existing Old Village (and between 30th and 20th ST) septic systems to see how many really need central sewer, regardless whether it is regional or local? Many people have asked for this survey for months. What is the reason the Council has not done a survey to get the FACTS? Issue #11 What is the TRUE status of the local sewage treatment systems, such as in Fields of St. Croix and all the other developments? Were they all installed Hamlet? Are they all are supposed to be? correctly, unlike the being maintained like they NAWE claims (9/24) there is no problem in Fields, in spite of what Ms. Smith said at the meeting on Sept. 11. Issue #12 Why does the Council refuse until after 2010 to extend sewer to the properties south of 10th St who want sewer? Doing this would help the REC use per the MOU. And you could extend water to them and have them pay for it, like they say they will. Issue #13 Why would 13000 residents (2.5 X 5200 RECs) south of 10th St., living at 3 units per acre or more density, be any different politically than 10,500 residents (2.5 X 4200 RECs) south of 10th St and 2500 residents (2.5 X 1000 RECs) in the Old Village, all living at 3 units per acre or more density. Why will the new people who move into that high density housing be any different, whether they live south of 10th St or in the Old Village? Neither population will have any idea about the small town we all moved here to enjoy. Issue #14 We all want the businesses in the Old Village to thrive. Comments have been made that there needs to be some unspecified "critical mass" of people in the Old Village for that to happen, thus justifying more housing than the Thorbeck study. Where is the published evidence that the Thorbeck plan would NOT provide enough people, but that the Engstrom plan WILL provide that unspecified "critical mass"? What is that unspecified number? Anecdotal tales about this or that isolated town are NOT sufficient evidence. Issue #15 Mayor Johnston has repeatedly stated that r regional sewer in the Old Village will allow the building of "amenities", such as a YMCA, large library, etc. Why will local sewage treatment not allow those same uses, assuming the residents want them? Why is regional sewer required for those uses?