Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-01-86 CCMSince we do not have time to discuss every point presented, it may seem that decisions are preconceived. However, background information is Provided for the City Council on each agenda item in advance from City Staff and appointed Commissions; and decisions are based on this information and past experiences. In addition, some items may also have been discussed at previous Council meetings. If you are aware of information that hasn't been discussed, please fill out a "Request to Appear Before the City Council" slip; or, if you came late, raise your hand to be recognized. Comments that are pertinent are appreciated. Items requiring excessive time may be continued to another meeting. AGENDA LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL April 1, 1986 7:00 p.m. Meeting Convenes 1. Agenda 2. Minutes: March 24, 1986 3. Claims 4. Public Inquiries 7:15 P.M. 5. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Acceptance of Brookfield Company land offer. B. Building Committee Update 7:30 p.m. 6. PLANNING AND LAND USE A. Request or S mple Lot Subdivision and Shoreland Ordinance Variance - Matt Northrup and Constance Smith (Tabled from the Council meeting of 3-24-86). 7:45 p.m. 7. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT A. County Road 1 BB 1. Request by Washington County for City Cooperation on Local Assessments. 2. Review of DNR Permit request by Washington County to allow placement of fill material in Goose Lake. B. 201 Program 1. Update on program schedule 2. Review of bids for easement appraisals C. Lower 33rd Street - Update on the feasibility of an alternate route at the junction with Lake Elmo Avenue. 8. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT A. Update - Manning Avenue Maintenance Agreement 9. Adjourn LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL APRIL 1, 1986 I`>k. {s. ti!l s MINUTES Vice -Mayor Christ called the City Council meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. in the City Council chambers. Present: Armstrong, Dunn, Mazzara, City Administrator Overby, City Engineer Bohrer and City Attorney Knaak. Absent: Morgan 1. Agenda Add: 8B. Composting Site, 8C. Sanitary Water Supply and 9. City Attorney's Report. M/S/P Dunn/Mazzara - to approve the agenda for the April 1, 1986 City Council meeting as amended. (Motion carried 4-0). 2. Minutes: March 24, 1986 M/S/P Armstrong/Dunn - to approve the March 24, 1986 City Council minutes as amended. (Motion carried 3-0-1<abstain: Mazzara>). 3. Claims Councilwoman Armstrong suggested refraining from paying #87221 $325.00 Pitney Bowes - copy machine supplies until more information has been received. City Administrator Overby is discussing other options with Pitney Bowes. The County has made available the option of doing purchasing with them and this might offer a cost savings. M/S/P Mazzara/Dunn - to approve the April 1, 1986 Claims #87208 thru #87239 as presented, excluding #87221. (Motion carried 4-0). 4. Public Inquiries There were no public inquiries. 5. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS A. Acceptance of Brookfield Company land offer. At the March 4, 1986 Council meeting, Kelly Brookman and Don Raleigh offered to donate a 1.5 acres lot to be used as the new City Hall site. The two conditions on the quit claim deed were: (1) that the City must start construction of the new City Hall by November 1, 1987. (2) the City use this property for a City Hall for at least fifteen years. A third condition was considered allowing them architectual review on the proposed City Hall, but changed their mind to wanting an opportunity to review the concept plans and offer their comments. Also mentioned was the real estate taxes which will be payable during the year of 1986 (in the approximate amount of $1,400.00) would have to be paid by the City LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 1, 1986 PAGE 2 unless the County will grant an abatement. Councilman Dunn suggested that the City Attorney review this deed from a legal standpoint and have the City Administrator find out what would it take for the County to grant an abatement. Knaak advised that he had no problem with the deed apart from the understanding that once the conditions are fulfilled that they would be willing to issue a warranty deed. A thank you letter will be written to the Brookfield Company on behalf of the Mayor and City Council. M/S/P Dunn/Mazzara - to adopt Resolution 86-24 accepting the 1.5 acre donated by the Brookfield Company for constructon of a new City hall with the three conditions set forth and with a request for a warranty deed. (Motion carried 4-0). B. Building Committee Update The Building Committee met with TKDA Architect Bill Armstrong to discuss the construction plans. Building plans and specfications must be completed by an architect licensed by the State of Minnesota, and these final plans will be ready for the first council meeting in May with construction starting in May. Councilman Christ handed out a report outlining the objectives and goals of the City. This was a guide that identified some of the critical steps; manpower requirements, materials and supplies that might be needed, some community resources, a list of several anticipated problems and possible solutions, and a proposed budget. It was pointed out by Christ that the ultimate goal to be accomplished by the City in undertaking this project will be the long range cost benefits to the taxpayers by the construction of an efficient, but modest structure that stays within the budget already allotted. It would benefit the entire community to rally behind the continuing efforts to keep city government costs down while still providing quality community services. Volunteer efforts can and will instill a pride of accomplishment on the part of community residents, but most importantly will ensure that local city government costs are kept to a minimum. Councilwoman Armstrong stated that she wholeheartedly approves of this idea of using volunteers to help build a City hall. The City cannot afford a $300,000 building because we do not want to raise the mill rate. Ownership is the key word. People who help with this partly own it and are proud of this City and what we can do. City Engineer Bohrer reported that there was a walk -over inspection of the site, and it appeared that the site was narrower than he thought. Because of this, they oriented the building in an east -west direction rather than north- south as originally anticipated. The topographic survey found that the actual property line is about in the middle of the blacktop access drive LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 1, 1986 PAGE 3 as opposed to the south edge of the blacktop. Bohrer is trying to secure the pert tests and soil borings from Dave Loos. The building committee felt that we should move ahead with final plans and specifications, so they asked TKDA to prepare an authorization for the design services, plans and specifications. M/S/P Dunn/Armstrong - to adopt Resolution 86-31 authorizing the Mayor and City Council to enter into an agreement with TKDA for architectual and engineering services for the City Hall and Council Chambers. (Motion carried 4-0). 6. PLANNING AND LAND USE A.- Request for Simple Lot Subdivision and Shoreland Ordinance Variance - Matt Northrup and Constance Smith. (Tabled from the Council meeting of 3-24-86). M/S/P Christ/Dunn - to remove from the table the request for a Simple Lot Subdivision from Matt Northrup and Constance Smith. (Motion carried 4-0). The applicants have changed the lot size back to the original 1.52 acre lot size as shown on the certificate of survey. They also showed a concept plan for a third lot to be subdivided in the future. With the application as now presented, only the variance to Shoreland Regulations for lot width is necessary. Matt Northrup explained that these are the last lots on Lake Elmo that can be subdivided and no other lots on this lake could come as near to meeting the code as they are proposing. He also pointed out that to the west all the lots are between 45 to 65 feet in width. The harship they believe is that they have a pie shaped lot and are taking a pie shaped piece off of it. Also, Northrup stated that Molly Comeau from the DNR had stated that she had no major concerns over the proposed subdivision, since there is adequate area to meet the structure and septic system setbacks. Councilwoman Armstrong explained that the map you are coming in with in front of the Council is an entirely different situation. Before you were asking us to divide from one piece of land to make two pieces of property and asking us for a hardship on this very small piece of land when you have so much land left over. We could not grant a hardship to someone who has all this excess land for shoreland frontage and acreage on two pieces. However, when you come to us asking to divide into three pieces that makes all the difference. Mr. Northrup answered that this is what we were trying to do at the last Council meeting, but it was their failure. City Engineer Bohrer explained that the problem is the ordinance does not spell out where the 150 feet of lot width is to be measured so it is somewhat up to interpretation. The intent of the original state shoreland management act is to regulate the LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 1, 1986 PAGE It intensity of development on the shoreline. City Attorney Knaak explained that the applicants are not bound by their proposal in the future and what you should be focusing on is what was heard at the last City Council meeting. Councilman Dunn stated that on a "pie shaped" lot it is difficult to get the 150 feet of shoreland and with the problem of how this ordinance could be interpretated, this could be a valid hardship. Councilman Christ felt that the hardship is the irregular shape of the parcel. M/S/P Dunn/Mazzara - to adopt Resolution 86-25 to grant a simple lot subdivision in accordance with the certificate of survey dated October 10, 1985 and a shoreland variance to Constance Smith at 3200 Lake ELmo Avenue. (Motion carried 3-1<Armstrong>) 7. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT A. County Road 19B Request by Washington County for City Cooperation on Local Assessments Washington County Engineer, Dick Herold appeared before the council to again request that the City participate with the County in assessing the property owners a portion of the construction costs relating to the County Road 19B improvements. The City was given the option of joining with the County on a joint project in making these assessments, or pass a resolution allowing the County to assess these costs. Mr. Herold suggested establishing an assessment rate that would be equivalent to a standard City street. Federal Land Development Company, Durow, Colon, Hammes, and Dayton Development Company abut the project. Iie further stated that the County is proposing to assess only Federal Land Development Company, Colon and Durow; Dayton does not benefit and Hammes is exempt due to prior right-of-way acquisition agreements. Councilman Dunn responded that he felt the road is going in primarily for the regional park. While there may be benefits down the road for the adjacent property owners, it is nothing more than a return on the taxes these property owners have paid over the years. He did not see where the property owners are going to get anything out of this over and above what they are entitled to. He felt that when you make assessments like this, you are forcing premature development which is not the intent of the present City Council. Herold responded that the road will benefit the regional park, but the potential park traffic will be a very minor part of the traffic pattern that he feels will be seen in this area. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 1, 1986 Councilmember Mazzara stated that regardless of encourage development or assessments encourage putting in the road does encourage development, assessed. PAGE 5 whether roads development, if it should be Councilmember Christ stated that to categorically say yes or no at this time would be impossible, but if the assessment could be kept reasonable and if it could be proven that there is an improvement in value to the property owners, a reasonable proposal would be acceptable. M/S/F Dunn/Armstrong - to not concur with Washington County to assess the County Road 19B improvements to the benefited property owners. (Motion failed 2-2<Christ, Mazzara>) 2. Review of DNR Permit request by Washington County to allow placement of fill material in Goose Lake The City Council reviewed the correspondence of the City Engineer datW March 19, 1986. Mr. Herold assured the City that the City's concerns for silt fence along the water's edge to prevent sediments from entering into the lake and also performance srandard for turf establishment, have been incorporated into the County's plans and specifications. M/S/P Mazzara/Dunn - to direct the City Engineer to respond to the DNR that the City's concerns have been met. (Motion carried 4-0). B. 201 Program 1. Update on program schedule City Engineer Bohrer distributed the project schedule, dated February 27, 1986. He stated that, due to about 20 individuals failing to return their access agreements and 6 individuals who have now asked to be withdrawn from the project, these two actions have now put back the project schedule betwen two and four weeks. Bohrer stated that he will seek MPCA approval to advertise for bids even though 20 agreements are still outstanding. 2. Review of bids for easement appraisals City Engineer Bohorer stated that proposals were received on March 26, 1986, for the work that needsto be done to acquire seven sites for joint drainfields and ei3ht utility easements. Three bids were received within the timeallotted, with Frank Langer submitting the4bwest bid. There was some discussion regarding the fact that it was not clear from Mr. Langer's proposal whether the fee quoted was for all of the thirteen sites or each of the thirteen sites. The Council had determined that even if the fee were for thirteen individual sites, he would still be the low bidder. M/S/P Dunn/Mazzara - to accept the low bid from Frank Langer and LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 1, 1986 PAGE 6 instruct the City Engineer and City Administrator to work out any details with Mr. Langer. (Motion carried 4-0). C. Lower 33rd Street - Update on the feasibility of an alternate route at the junction with Lake Elmo Avenue At a previous City Council meeting, the Council instructed City Engineer Bohrer to evaluate the feasibility of an alternate route at the junction with Lake Elmo Avenue being located south of the Joshua Taylor building. Bohrer showed a concept plan that indicated it was feasible, from a road geometric standpoint, to pass south of the Joshua Taylor building. He further reported that he had reviewed the concept with Bob Hagstrom, owner of the property, and Mr. Hagstrom is evaluating the proposal. If this is acceptable to Mr. Hagstrom, the design will be reviewed by MnDOT to make sure that State Aid Standards could be met and then return to the City Council for authorization to have the property appraised. Bohrer will report back at a later meeting when progress is made on the project. 8. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT A. Update - Manning Avenue Maintnenace Agreement City Administrator Overby has met with Charlotte Kirby, Baytown Clerk, to discuss how this dispute might be resolved. Baytown's position remains basically the same. They feel that Manning Avenue from 55th Street to TH365 is a "town line road" dividing the township and the City. Accordingly, theyfeel that a 50-50 cost split is equitable. The City Administrator will discuss the possibility of trading services, Lake Elmo would do the grading if Baytown would do the snowplowing. B. Composting Site Rick Grooms has notified the staff that the compost site at 4259 Jamaca Ave. N. will be opened April 19 thru May 18, 1986, Wednesdays 12:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Saturdays and Sunday 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Boy Scout Troop Leader, Dave Olson, will be asked if his troop is interested in working these weekends as they did last year. C. County Water Supply Councilman Christ handed out to the City Council a Residential. Water Quality Summary. The Council will review this and it will be discussed at the April 15, 1986 City Council meeting. 9. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney passed out a letter from Attorney Richard M. Arney in which he is proposing a settlement of the dispute of Alford, LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 1, 1986 PAGE 7 Berube vs. the City of Lake ELmo. Mr. Alford is asking the City to consider favorably a variance and building permit for a summer cottage of a smaller size with suitable set back variances and variances for a self-contained septic system of the pump variety. City Attorney Knaak recommended that the City Council not accept this settlement offer under the circumstances because this was fought on the fact for the purpose of strictly enforcing the code. The City Council has taken a tough stand and we might be establishing a precident. The City Council will leave this as an agenda item for the next meeting. There is need to get more information from Alford for the City Engineer's consideration. M/S/P Armstrong/Mazzara - to adjourn the City Council meeting at 10:15 p.m. (Motion carried 4-0). Resolution 86-24 - Accept the 1.5 acre donated by the Brookfield Co. for construction of a new City Hall with the three conditions set forth and with a request for a warranty deed. Resolution 86-25 - granting a simple lot subdivision and a shoreland variance to Constance Smith at 3200 Lake Elmo Ave. Resolution 86-31 - authorizing the Mayor and City Council to enter into an agreement with TKDA for architectual & engineering services for the City Hall and Council Chambers