HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-03-87 CCMNO
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 3, 1987
Mayor Christ called the City Council meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
in the City Council chambers. Present: Christ, Armstrong, Moe,
Graves, City Attorney Knaak and City Administrator Overby.
Absent: Johnson
Mayor Christ welcomed everyone to their new City Hall and Council
Chambers. Christ extended his thanks to the volunteers who have
helped make the City Hall a reality. Lake Elmo has earned the
right to be very proud of its accomplishment.
1. Agenda
Add: 6B. Special City Council Meeting on Liabiity and Umbrella
Insurance, 6C. Housekeeping Items on City Hall.
M/S/P Graves/Armstrong - to approve the Agenda for the February 3,
1987 City Council meeting as amended. (Motion carried 4-0).
2. Minutes: January 20, 1987
Councilman Graves explained that his suggestion for appreciation
certificates from the last meeting was not an attempt to deride
the contributions of the people that put- in their time toward the
new building. It was an attempt to make some recognition of the
volunteers because he was not aware of other plans. He had
indicated that the paper was of higher quality and a little more
special than the typical paper we used in printing up thank you
letters. He knew there was a concern on expense, as expressed many
times by the people on the Council. Graves thought the price was
reasonable, but the intent was not to cheapen the contributions
made by the volunteers.
M/S/P Moe//Graves - to approve the January 20, 1987 City Council
minutes as amended (See verbatim minutes on 4. Planning Commission
Appointments and D. Recognition of City Hall Volunteers). (Motion
carried 4-0).
3. Claims
All claims are within budget.
M/S/P Armstrong/Graves - to approve the February 3, 1987 Claims
#88343 thru #88399 as presented. (Motion carried 4-0).
4. Public Inquiries
After reading an article in the Oakdale/Lake Elmo Review, Bruce
Dunn felt the reason he was not considered for the Planning
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 2
Commission was because of Moe's accusation that he had not
obtained a building permit for a tool shed. (Dunn provided a copy
of this building permit dated January 9, 1984). Dunn further
questioned Moe on his statement to the paper that he could not
support Dunn's appointment because it was similar to the majority
of the current Planning Commission members, and because of his
"integrity". Dunn challenged Moe's concern for integrity as he
felt Moe (and Gaves) used extortion or blackmail to keep him off
of the Planning Commission. Moe replied that he did not know what
extortion meant and asked. Dunn if he gave him any money or
promised him anything if this was considered blackmail.
Dunn elaborated by saying that Graves approached Christ before the
meeting and told him Moe had some very damaging information on
Dunn that he was going to bring up that would reflect on. Dunn's
ability to hold office on the Planning Commission. Graves told
Christ that this information might reflect negatively on Dunn and
Christ should have the opportunity to discuss with Dunn whether or
not he wanted to pursue a seat on the Planning Commission. Graves
also indicated to Christ at this time that he was aware that
Christ would not support Fred Nazarian from the Planning
Commission, and that Graves would ask Nazarian to withdraw his
candidacy for the Planning Commission and Christ should do the
same with Dunn.
Dunn further questioned the validity of the Resolution he received
from the City thanking him for his years of service to the
community since Graves and Moe both voted for the resolution and
then publicly questioned his integrity. Dunn suggested that the
City adopt a code of conduct governing city officials. He feels
that when citizens volunteer for city service they should not be
chastized or subjected to blackmail. He feels that if a council
member has a problem with an individual or particular violation,
they should follow the established process.
Graves asked if this code of conduct would include the type of
questionning the Mayor had of Fred. Nazarian at the previous
meetinng. Dunn responded that if Naza,rian had any complaints
about what was said he too had the right to bring them up under
public inquiries.
Christ publically apologized to Fred Nazarian and stated he will
also do this to Nazarian in person, and stated he supported the
code of conduct legislation. Moe proceeded to apologize to Dunn
for the builling permit inquiry stating that if Christ can do it
so can he.
Armstrong stated that she made the initial call to the newspaper
as a public official as she felt thwre was unfounded accusations
indicative of blackmail which were used to keep a. potential
candidate (Dunn) off of the Planning Commission. She agrees with
a code of conduct for officials and suggested the city attorney
set the ground rules for this code.
M/S/P Armstrong/Moe - to direct City Administrator Overby in
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 3
conjunction with the City Attorney to set the groundwork for a
code of conduct for City Council officials. (Motion carried 4-0).
5. PLANNING, LAND USE AND ZONING
A. Candidate Landfill Site - Dan Novak & Todd Williams
Dan Novak and Todd Williams gave an update on the progress of the
city's efforts to oppose the proposed landfill site located in the
Regional Park. The site is one of eight remaining proposed
landfill sites on the Metropolitan Council's inventory list, and
Is one of two sites targeted in regional parkland. The Lake Elmo
site is the only site on the east side of the Metro Area. The
proposed opening date for the Lake Elmo site is 1993, according to
the Met Council's Solid Waste Management Policy Plan. Currently,
the County is at the request for proposal for the environmental
assessment worksheet (EAW) stage in the siting process. This is
followed by the environmental impact statement (EIS) scheduled to
be completed in early to mid 1988. If the EIS identifies no
problems, the site is then permitted by the MPCA. They have been
told that, although it is unlikely, it is possible that the Lake
Elmo site would go on line in as little as two years.
Novak identified two actions that, without any effort from the
Council or the Lake Elmo citizens, could cause the site to fall
off the list. 1. Environmental Impact Statement; 2. Permit
applications are currently under consideration for expansion of
the Flying Cloud and Anoka site which could eliminate the need for
any of the 8 proposed sites.
Novak added that there are restrictive convenants that exist on
all parcels of land purchased for the Regional Park by Washington
County. The restrictive convenants state that the land shall be
used for no other purposes. However, there is a stipulation that
Washington County has to initiate the request to the Met Council
and then the Met Council would not have any problem approving it.
Williams and Novak requested the use of the Lake Elmo newsletter
for dissemination of information and soliciting help. Also, a
request was made for recognition by the Council of a citizen
advisory committee which would consist of Williams, Novak, the
ABLE Organization and Tablyn Park residents. They would like to
use the City Council chambers on Sunday nights for meetings.
Mayor Christ complimented Novak and Williams for doing an
incredible job in getting information. The consensus.- of the
Council was in favor of all requests. A special council meeting
will be held. on Sunday at 7 p.m. in the council chambers and will
include information on the landfill site and strategies to explore
in the city's attempts to disqualify it.
Dave Morgan informed the Council that he serves on the County
Landfill Selection Committee and he has heard nothing from the
County nor has he had any meetings. In his research lie has found
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 4
somewhere between 80 and 100 percent of all the landfills in this
country are contaminating the groundwater. He feels from a
geological point of view, in addition to a. political
point -of -view, the City has a strong arguement if only someone
will listen in order to get the message across.
As one of the strategies to oppose the landfill, Williams informed
the Council that Woodbury, which had essentially the same soil
boring results in 1984 as the Lake Elmo sites (1981), had hired a
geologist. The report the geologist wrote resulted in the
Woodbury site being thrown out, and we should do the same thing.
Williams has talked to the same geolgist who wrote the Woodbury
report, and the geologist said he would write one for Lake Elmo
for less than $2,500. If the reports are similar, then we can say
the Lake Elmo site has to be thrown out. If it is not thrown out,
Williams felt we would have legal recourse. Mayor Christ felt that
using the same geologist would lend some credibiity to the report
for legal purposes.
M/S/P Christ/Graves - to adopt Resolution 87-20 authorizing an
allotment of up to $2500 taken out of the Miscellaneous Funds to
hire a geologist to write up a report. (Motion carried. 4-0).
B. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for variance to
required sideyard setback; George Everitt,
4460 Jack Pine Trail N.
(Request withdrawn)
Mr. George Everitt at 4460 Jack Pine Trail N. has withdrawn his
request for a variance.
C. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for variance to allow
consE-r-u-c-t1—o-n--oT an accessory building under an
amended Conditional Use Permit.
Leonard and LuAnn Hanson, 10824 Hudson Blvd.
Pursuant to public notice, Mayor Christ opened up the public
hearing at 7:55 p.m. in the City Council chambers.
Public notice was duly sent and published.
Mr. Pat Farrell, attorney representing Leonard and LuAnn Hanson,
presented their request for an amendment to his Conditional use
Permit to allow construction of a 40' x 60' building. The
proposed building is intended to provide a work space to service
his trailer units.
Mr. Farrell explained that the Hanson's property is an unique
situation, because at the time the property was acquired the
Planning Commission and City of Lake Elmo approved the rezoning of
the property to General Business. At the same time, there was an
agreement that the Hanson's would be bound by whatever Future Land.
Use would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The 1979 Plan
shows it as Highway Commercial after 1990 and the 1986 Future Land
Use shows it as Agricultural. After the Hansons received the
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 5
General Business zoning, they proceeded to apply for a Conditional
Use Permit which was granted.
The uses on this property are a home, apartments for his mother
and grandmother (not a rental situation), trailer sales, and
raising of llamas that are sold as pets. Because these are
passive uses, traffic problems are non-existent, impact on
surrounding property is minimal or none and the unique character
of this property is one that the landowner did not create himself.
The hardships are the City's participation in whatever took place
in the past and the Highway Dept. came in and took one acre of
their land. The property is very difficult to use as it is if you
want to call it Agricultural zoning, and is a non -conforming use
in that area. Also, Mr. Hanson has had health problems and has
been out of work. This has been a business that he was operating
as his sole source of livelihood. Farrell felt this was an
excellent transitory kind of use for this property. Farrell could
not see this situation being a precedent, because you could not
find a piece of property in Lake Elmo with all the problems this
parcel has.
City Administrator Overby had made the following review:
Zoning District
The proposed building would be located on agriculturally zoned
property where the allowed uses are governed by a CUP. The
provisions of the CUP must be changed, in order to allow the
proposed building. The building must meet all other code
requirements. The site is in the I-94 Overlay District.
Type of Building Being Proposed
The CUP amendment application would permit a 40' x 60' accessory
building which would be used as a workshop to service the RV
trailer units. The City Council had amended the Hanson CUP on
12-15-81 to allow the open sales lot operation subject to three
conditions, one of which was that "no permanent structures be
built in support• of this use". This condition would have to be
deleted or amended in order to allow the proposed building.
Building Size and Number
The total area of the 40' x 60' building would be 2,400 square
feet. Section 301.130 C. of the City Code provides design and
performance standards for accessory buildings and structures.
Sub -section C-14 indicates that: "For parcels under (10) acres,
two buildings with a total area not to exceed one thousand (1,000)
square feet..." would be allowed. The Hanson property is 7.91
acres in total area. Therefore, only two accessory buildings
could be allowed; although there already exists a 50' x 22'
machine shed, a 22' x 16' granary and a 12' x 18' garage on the
north. A variance on the number and size of accessory buildings
would be required to allow an additional building.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 6
Lot -Size
The existing parcel of land is 7.91 acres in size and does not
meet the minimum lot size of 110 acres for the Agricultural zone.
It is a previously platted parcel of record. However, the 10 acre
minimum lot size provision of the I-94 Overlay District does
apply. A variance of minimum lot size would be required.
City Administrator Overby stated that the Hanson's have indicated
they, would be willing to move the building back, but fill would
have to be brought in. It was determined by Bohrer and Overby that
ponding requirements had been met and there would be no problem
relative to drainage and ponding using a site further back. The
alternate site would require more preparation, but this would
eliminate one variance.
Councilwoman Armstrong felt that configuration of the land could
be a hardship if there were no where else to go for land.. There
is a lot of land around them that they could buy to make up for
the needed acreage. Mr. Hanson had spoken to Gene Peltier, and he
would sell them land (78 acres) in the back which is landlocked,
for $4500 an acre.
City Attorney Knaak explained that regardless what the City does
this has no precedential value for anything other than identical
situations. Knaak added that the City of Lake has never engaged
in contract zoning.
City Attorney Knaak stated that it has been a past Council policy
to table a decision for two weeks after a public hearing and
encourages the council to continue this procedure.
Mayor Christ closed the public hearing at 8:44 p.m.
M/S/P Graves/Armstrong - to table the variance requests by Leonard
& LuAnn Hanson until the February 17, 1987 City Council meeting.
(Motion carried 3-1<Moe>).
D. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for variances to allow operation
of a retail business in an existing building at
11227 Stillwater Blvd; Richard Kosman
Pursuant to published notice, Mayor Christ opened up the public
hearing at 8:49 p.m.
Public notice was duly sent and published.
Richard Kosman proposes to operate a retail floor covering and
installation business from the former Pepin Engineering property
at the southeast corner of TH 5 and Laverne Avenue. A rezoning
from Industrial to General Business would be required to permit
the planned use. In addition, some slight exterior remodeling in
the form of an added entryway on the east side of the building is
proposed.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 7
The Planning Commission decided on 1-12-87 that the property (0.30
acres) be rezoned from Industrial Park to General Business, with
the provision that lot size and other variances identified in the
City Engineer's letter of 1-•8-87 be approved by the City Council.
The Commission reviewed the plans on 1-12-87 and discussed several
variances and the existing non -conformity of the lot. Their
motion for rezoning also include the recommendation that the City
Council approve the following variances:
a. variance to side (corner) setback - 10 feet vs.
50 feet required.
b. variance to number and location of off-street parking
spaces - 10 spaces vs. 23 required.
c. Variance to the buffer strip between a general
business zone and residential zone - 35 foot strip
required; 10 foot strip existing.
d. Variance to front yard setback - 20 feet existing,
50 feet required.
e. Variance to rear yard setback - 10 feet existing,
50 feet required.
f. Variance to side yard (interior) setback --
10 feet existing, 20 feet required.
0.30 acres (Amended 2-17-87)
g. Variance to minimum lot size - 0,-24-acres existing,
1.5 acres required.
h. Variance to minimum lot width - 120 feet existing,
150 feet required.
i. Variance to corner lot sight distance - 100 feet unimpeded
sight distance on either side of TH5/Laverne Avenue intersection.
The principal building extends about 20 feet into this area.
Kosman stated he has verbal committment from the Twin Point Tavern
and the VFW for overflow parking. He would not consider tearing
down the quonset hut, but he has plans for cleaning and paintinng
it.
City Administrator Overby stated that this is a sales and service
operation. Kosman added that it is wholesale pricing, but a
retail application.
City Administrator Overby stated that City Engineer Bohrer's main
concerns were the variances and the nonconformity of the parking
spaces in terms of safety and access from the state highway and
Laverne. Bohrer is concerned about how people can get in and out
of the site and wants to prevent anyone backing out onto the
highway or side street. Another concern in regard to the
intersection of Laverne and Highway 5 was whether the proposed use
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 8
would add to existing traffic congestion or create a problem that
does not presently exist.
Overby felt the site is non -conforming regardless of what use
might apply there. He could not say what uses could go in there
that would eliminate the non -conforming situation. Steve DeLapp,
Chairman of the Planning Commission, stated that the building
could be used for what the building was always used for before it
was abandoned.
City Attorney Knaak added that when you change the zoning laws you
create non -conforming uses. It is designed to phase out certain
kinds of uses. In a non -conforming use, once that use is destroyed
or discontinued as a use, or actual destruction of the property
occurs, that use is gone. You now have the property there for
whatever it is zoned for. In this case it does. A
grandfathered-in manufacturing business and zoning changes around
it you cannot do anything to that property or change that business
because you would be taking something from it.
Dwight Peterson, 2234 Spruce Place, White Bear Lake, is the
son --in-law of the owner of the building. The owner moved out of
state a couple of months ago, but the buildings were not
abandoned. She has been making an effort to sell the building
through Merrill Lynch Realty. The buildings have been vacant
since August or September of 1986.
Mayor Christ closed the public hearing at 9:02 p.m.
City Administrator Overby brought up the point that the code does
allow a non -conforming use to substitute for another
nonconforming use if the Council decides that the proposed new
use will be no more detrimental to its neighborhood and
surroundings than the use it Is to replace. This does not create
an agruement for granting variances, but there is a provision in
the code that allows substitution of non -conforming uses.
Councilwoman Armstrong stated that in the beginning of the zoning
ordinances the reasoning for having the ordinances states that it
is proper for us to enforce the regulations for these specific
purposes: to protect the character and maintain the stability of
residential business in industrial areas within the community and
prohibit uses, building or structures which are incompatible with
the character of development in such areas; to be careful to limit
the congestion of public streets; to provide for the gradual
elimination of those uses of land, buildings and structures and of
those buildings and structures which do not conform to the
standards of the area in which they are located and which may
adversely affect the development and value of the property in such
areas. Armstrong added that there was a time when those buildings
were more acceptable than they are now. We have had people put
money into businesses along the mainstreet and she felt we should
consider those people's needs for their businesses and what they
are trying to achieve in the City.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 9
M/S/P Armstrong/Graves - to table Richard Kosman's variance
requests to allow operation of a retail business in an existing
building at 11222 Stillwater Blvd. until the February 17, 1987
City Council meeting. (Motion carried 3-1<Moe>).
E. Cimarron Golf Course CUP Renewal
This permit renewal was discussed at the 1-6-87 City Council
meeting. At that time a concern was raised about the daily
sprinkling schedule for the golf course as opposed to the odd/even
day schedule for Cimarron residents.
Dan Krawezyk, owner and manager of Cimarron Park, stated they have
one water system, but have two wells on the property. The
watering on the golf course is done late in the evening. The
water policy is that even number residents water on even number
days and odd number residents water on odd number days. Moe
brought up the problem that when it is hot and dry, water should
be provided to the owner before it is swallowed by a golf course,
but this has not happened with the new management.
As far as mowing the golf course, Krawezyk stated that the
earliest his people start with the outside perimeter is 6:30 a.m.
Krawczyk had no objections to writing these conditions on mowing
and watering.
Another concern was related to the lack of handicapped restrooms
and other facilities at the golf course. Jim McNamara, Building
Inspector, indicated to the City Administrator that there is no
requirement in the local or state building codes that handicapped
facilities be provided, unless remodeling work were to be done at
the golf course. If that were the case, then handicapped
facilities would have to be installed. City Attorney Knaak
explained that as he reads the statute, it states that after a
certain length of time all buildings must comply. There is
nothing to preclude them as long as there is a reasonable basis
for insisting on this.
M/S/P Moe/Graves - to table the Cimarron CUP renewal until. the
City Staff finds how the state statute reads regarding handicapped
facilities. (Motion carried 4-0).
F. Hammes Mining CUP Renewal
An inspection of the Hammes property was conducted on January 28,
1987 by City Administrator Overby and Building Official Jim
McNamara. Jim McNamara found considerable clean --up had been
accomplished by the Hammes' along with some screening on the west
side and north side. The screening or berming on the west side
for the barn and to the south had not been completed at the time
of the inspection. Much of t?J items laying around in that area
have been moved to a low area in back and are out of sight. The
two mobile homes and semi -trailer remaining on the property are
intended to be used for temporary storage until such time that a
new pole type building can be erected. If the two mobile homes
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 10
are accepted by the Council as temporary storage buildings,
McNamara doesn't feel it is necessary to place them on permanent
foundations. The blue structure, facing loth Street is still in
the process of being placed on its permanent foundation. The
white structure intended to be used as an office at the mining
site has not been properly secured as yet. The road has to be
substantially done before the white structure can be taken care
of. The accumulation of ,junk and other debris behind the main
house still remains; however, McNamara doesn't feel it is in
direct view from loth Street or 19B.
City Administrator Overby asked if the proposed pole barn, which
will be used to store some things related to the mining operation,
should be in the 1987 CUP.
M/S/P Christ/Graves - to adopt Resolution 87-2.1 authorizing the
renewal of the Hammes CUP for 1987 until June 1,1987; subject to
an inspection by the City staff; the same format as 1986 but
change the compliance dates. (Motion carried 4--0).
6. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
A. Lake Elmo Representative to Stillwater Area
Economic Development Corporation.
Hugh Madson asked that the City Council discuss whether Lake Elmo
should appoint an official representative to the Stillwater Area
Economic Development Corporation. In a letter dated 1-28-•1987,
Mr. Madson has volunteered to serve as the City representative.
Mr. Madson strongly recommended Lake Elmo have a board member
representative on what will become a very important organization.
The purpose is to assist in coordinating new business development
for the central Washington County area as well as assisting those
businesses who are already there.
The consensus of the Council was to send this request to the
Planning Commission for their recommendation, because it is a
planning issue.
B. Insurance
M/S/P Armstrong/Graves - to hold an informational meeting on
municipal state aid program and Nroposed project for 43rd Street,
47th Street, Kimbro Avenue and 50th Street and on the 1987
Insurance coverage on Wednesday, February 10, 1987 at 7:00 p.m.
(Motion carried 4-0).
M/S/P. Moe/Christ - to hold a mity council meeting on Sunday, February 2, 1987
at 7:00 p.m. to discuss initiatives to oppose the candidate landfill site in
the Rak&oHdxho Regional Park. (Motion carried. 4-0).
C. Housekeeping Items
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 3, 1987 PAGE 11
City Administrator Overby will secure a mail box for the City
hall. Overby suggested a directional sign be put on Highway 5
indicating the Lake Elmo City Hall.
M/S/P Moe/Craves - to recommend to the City Staff to make
arrangements for a directional sign be put on Highway 5 indicating
the Lake Elmo City Hall. (Motion carried. 4-0).
M/S/P Moe/Christ - to adjourn the City Council meeting at 10:15
p.m. (Motion carried 4-0).
Resolution 87-20 authorizing an allotment of up to $2500 taken.out of the
Miscellaneous Funds to hire a geologist to write up a report
for Iake Elmo,
Resolution 87-21 authorizing the renewal of the Hammes CUP for 1987 until June 1, 1987
subject to an inspection by the City staff, using, the same
format as 1986, but change the compliance dates.