Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-17-89 CCMPPRED 9 ' LAKE ELMO CITY.COUNCIL MINUTES JANUA.RY 1.7 , 1989 Mayor Dunn called the City Council. meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council. chambers. Present: Dunn, Hunt, Williams, Graves, Moe, City Engineer Bohrer, City Attorney Knaak and City Administrator Morrison. JAYCEE PROCLAMATION: Mayor Dunn proclaimed the week of January 15-21, 1989 as Jaycee Week and urged all citizens of our community to give full regard to the past and continuing services of the Lake Elmo Jaycees. 1. Agenda Add: 12D. Workshop for City Council and City Administrator, 12E. Snowmobiles M/S/P Graves/Williams - to approve the January 17, 1989 City Council. agenda as amended. (Motion carried 5--0). 2. Minutes: January 3, 1989 M/S/P Williams/Hunt - to approve the January 3, 1989 City Council minutes as amended. (See Page 2, 6. Introduction; Page 6, F. CUP Review; Page 10 D. Proposed Ordinance Amendment). (Motion carried 4-0-1 Abstain: Graves). 3. Claims M/S/P Graves/Moe - to approve the January 17, 1989 Claims #91318:thru #91368 as presented. (Motion carried 5-0). 4. Planning Commission Applicant Interviews Seven applications have been received for a position on the Planning Commission: Kelly Brookman, Arlyn Christ, Rita Conlin, Wyn John, Richard Johnson, Floyd Olson, Bruce Weeks. The City Administrator was informed by Bruce Weeks that he has withdrawn his name and Arlyn Christ has asked his application be delayed for reconsideration. The following motions were made after the Council interviewed the five applicants. M/S/F Graves/Moe a- to appoint Kelly Brookman as a Full -Voting member on the Lake Elmo Planning Commission. (Motion failed 2-3: Hunt, Williams, Dunn). M/S/P Hunt/Dunn - to appoint Richard Johnson to the Lake Elmo Planning Commission as a. Full -Voting member. (Motion carried 3-2: Moe, Graves). LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 2 M/S/F Graves/Moe - to appoint Kelly Brockman to the Lake Elmo Planning Commission as First Alternate. (Motion failed 2-3: Hunt, Williams, Dunn). M/S/P Hunt/Williams - to appoint Rita Conlin to the Lake Elmo Planning Commission as First Alternate. (Motion carried 3-2: Moe, Graves). M/S/F Graves/Moe - to appoint Kelly Brockman to the Lake Elmo Planning Commission as Second Alternate. (Motion failed 2-3: Hunt, Williams, Dunn). M/S/P Hunt/Williams - to appoint Wyn John to the Lake Elmo Planning Commission as Second Alternate. (Motion carried 3-2: Moe, Graves). 5. REAPP Report Dan Novak advised the Council. that ReAPP has submitted 108 names of firms that will be sent Request for Qualifications for review of the EIS. The staff will send out these RFQ's and ask that these qualifications be received, by the City, by February 13, 1989. It is the City's intent to select four or five qualified candidates by February 22, 1.989 and request proposals from those firms or individuals. Novak asked Council permission for Administrator Morrison to attend the first ReAPP meeting of the month. Councilman Williams, who also serves as ReAPP's Co -Chair, stated this was the first he heard of this request and asked to postpone the request for further discussion. George Crocker, representing Leslie Davis of Earth Protector, announced Lake Elmo has been selected to receive the Steve Gadler Earth Protector Award for excellence in environmental advocacy. Steve Gadler, prior to his death on April 5, 1985, was on the board of the MPCA for 17 years, and considered a voice of the people for the environment. The Lake Elmo Citizens, in voting to raise their taxes in order to provide money to oppose a garbage dump in the park reserve, are providing the entire state an example of community spirit and committment to excellence in protecting land designated as a park reserve. On February 12, 1989, 7 to 10 p.m., at the Atrium in the International Market Square, the City will be awarded the Steve Gadler Earth Protector Award. 6. Senator Gary Laidig, Rep. Harriet McPherson As a result of the detachment/annexation proceedings that have occurred for Lake Elmo, Councilman Williams has asked these legislators to try to locate background on the Bill that was passed in 1985 that allowed individual property owners to detach themselves from a City and to discuss with them the possibilites for repealing legislation. City Attorney Knaak provided a draft of a repealer bill which states this subdivision should be repealed. Senator Laidig advised in 1985, at the request of the Minnesota LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 3 Municipal Board, new language was added in the detachment/annexation laws which provided another avenue of approach for propertyowners to seek detachment/annexation to other municipalities. Laidig has talked to the Municipal Board and they will provide an explanation on whether it was specific decisions or problems that were occurring in 1985 that lead them to pass the legislation and make this change. Laidig contacted Bill Lento from Little Canada, who was one of the two authors of the Bill, and he did not have strong feelings about legislation introduced to consider repealment. Councilman Williams stated he does not like to see our city chewed off., bit by bit by our neighbors, and he would like to see legislation to support repeal. Councilman Moe responded that Stalin and Hitler both had the same idea; pass laws so people cannot use any of their rights and let the State make all the decisions for all the propertyowners. Moe added he would fight the repeal legislation and any Senator who backs it now and in the future. Councilman Hunt felt that a city does have certain rights and landowners have certain rights, and it was really sad when those two groups cannot get together and work out a compromise and still preserve things for both people. By allowing certain individuals to take major actions, such as this, that could impact the long-term stability of the City is dangerous. This current council will be sympathetic to people and work with them, but at the same time they don't want to have be threaten (with a petition for detachment/annexation) every time a landowner doesn't get to do exactly what they want. McPherson agreed with Councilman Hunt that it is a shame that problems within the City cannot be solved by that City and that the State had to get involved. She added that they have to look at where the problem was, what was Woodbury offering that Lake Elmo cannot offer and try to mediate in order to bring the people together to resolve the problem and bring on a compromise rather than change legislation. If the law is wrong, this will be changed, but it is too bad that Lake Elmo cannot work out the problem. She will take input from the Council, and go back to the legislature and go through House research for the information requested. Councilman Williams explained there are new faces on the Council with new ideas and new attitudes, and they are interested in working with the landowners and are taking time at this meeting to discuss how we can work together with the Section 32 landowners. Williams complimented Section 32 propertyowners, Dreher and Kirvida, for working with the City and not just signing off to Oakdale. Councilman Graves did not want to see the lands detached and was opposed to the detachment of the previous parcel of Section 32 looking at it from a community perspective. On the other hand, he was sympathetic to the frustration the people have expressed. From a community standing, he felt the property was valuable to the future well-being and, if possible, tax base expansion for the community. It LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 4 is important that an individual community and the people within that community are able to set the tone for the development or lifestyle (land utilization) within their own boundaries without having to worry about getting into land use, competitive bidding wars, with adjacent communities. The community should control their own destiny. Graves added you have to balance against the perogati.ve and desires of the individual propertyowners within that area to be able to make what they consider a proper use of the land. Graves suggested a list of criteria be set in this type of legislation where a series of reasonable steps can be taken by both parties to work together and very clearly demonstrate that a City has not shown a willingness over a period of years in certain type of activities, to make decisions to deem a reasonable use of the property. Then an opinion should be available to those landowners to ask for joint detachment/annexation with adjoining communities with the Municipal Board. The process would be more rigorous than what was experienced, previously, with Section 32. In terms of what you want to do in the future to protect the City, Knaak advised the Council, you would want to try to get the repealer through. This Subdivision was a small, seemingly inocuious little thing, that got slipped through by the Municipal Board. There was not wide -spread understanding of its possible use as a tool. Laidig asked for a resolution from the Council which would allow them to get involved in setting hearing dates. A resolution was not offered by the Council, but Councilman Williams anticipated offering a resolution at the next meeting. Laidig will report back to the Council with his findings. 7. PLANNING/LAND USE/ZONING: A. PUBLIC HEARING: Variances to lot size, distance between signs, and hours an advertising sign can be illuminated. (Ad Venture Media, Inc., J. Olson) Mayor Dunn opened up the public hearing at 8:45 p.m. in the City Council chambers. Jamie Olson, part owner of the one -acre strip of land and on behalf of Adventure Media, Inc., has applied for a conditional use permit to permit a 10' x 20' advertising sign to be placed on a parcel of land in Section 36 along I-94 in the General Business Zoning District. This advertising sign would require three variances: (1) lot size; (2) distance between signs; (3) hours advertising sign can be illuminated. Former Councilmember Rosemary Armstrong stated the Vali Hi Drive In has been there a long time with a sign. She advised the Council that Jamie Olson was given a final settlement of $34,715 in 1984 for the property acquired by Mn/DOT for the completion of I-94. (Ms. Olson originally had 1.31 acres; Mn/DOT acquired .31 acres, about a 30 foot strip of land along the corridor). The City of Lake Elmo did not take LAKE ELM CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PACE 5 anything from this property owner. The Lake Elmo Municipal Code does not provide the circumstances to be a justifiable reason to grant a variance. This is the third time she has come in with an application and there is no measurable changes in her application. Armstrong recommended to the Council that this should be the last time she can come in with this application. Ms. Olson felt the taking of her land by Mn/DOT had nothing to do with this application, that the City of Lake Elmo was the only agency that could grant her the requested variances. Pictures were provided by Ms. Olson showing two signs erected by the Vali Hi Drive -In Theater which is located by her property. Olson added that large panels have been blown out of the projection screen from the wind and has become an eyesore because it has not been maintained, consequently, devaluing her property. Mayor Dunn closed the public hearing at 9:1.0 p.m. Councilman Hunt stated, contrary to what Ms. Olson has indicated, a conversation with staff. and Adeel Lari, Right-of-way Engineer for Mn/DOT, a final settlement was made in 1984. Mr. Lari stated that Mn/DOT does take into consideration local zoning ordinances when determining compensation and the propertyowner had the opportunity to ask for a "total take" that is, she could have argued that the 1 acre parcel remaining was non -conforming to local ordinances, and therefore, of no use to her. This may have increased the $34,715 compensation given for the 0.31 acres. Administrator Morrison informed the Council that Mr. O'Neal, owner of the Vali.-Hi Drive In, had called to voice his objection to Ms. Olson's application when it was before the Planning Commission. At that meeting, Ms. Olson brought up the two signs that have been erected by Vali-Hi Drive In. Building Official Jim McNamara has talked to Mr. O'Neal. who advised him he has a site for a sign which was being drawn up and the sign will be constructed within the next 3 months, if the weather allows. The two existing signs will be replaced by one permanent sign. The Council decided if this sign was not erected within three months and the existing signs removed, the Vali Hi -Drive In CUP will be modified. The Council carefully reviewed Ms. Olson's application, and based upon their examination of the arugment and evidence presented, as well as knowledge of the nature and size of the parcel in question, they made the following: FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. That the public hearing notice was duly published and sent to all. adjacent propertyowners. 2. That the parcel in question is owned by Jamie, Wendy, and Todd Olson. 3. That a letter was written to the applicant, dated May 17, 1985, advising her this parcel of land does not LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 6 constitute a buildable lot per Section 301.070 D.7.c of the Lake Elmo Municipal Code. The minimum requirement in the General Business zone is 1 1/2 acres per unit and this parcel is approximately 1 acre in size. 4. That the applicant has presented a like application in 1985, and again in 1986, both of which were denied. The applicant has not presented any change in conditions or new facts or circumstances to warrant approval of this application; 5. That the proposed sign placement is not in compliance with Code requirements of a minimum distance of 3,000' between signs; 6. That the applicant has not presented a valid hardship under standards required by the Lake Elmo City Code and statutory definition to allow for approval of the variances. 7. That the Planning Commission, voted unanimously, to recommend denial of the application for CUP and the variances requests in conjunction with the CUP based on the above Findings of Fact. M/S/P Graves/Hunt - resolved that. the City Council recommends denial of the application for CUP and variances of Jamie, Todd and Wendy Olson, dba Ad Venture Media, Inc. for construction of an advertising sign in a General Business zone on the parcel of land legally described as Part of the S 1/2 of the SW 1/4 commencing at the Southwest corner of Section 36 thence East along South line of said Section 1510.7, based on the above findings of Fact. (Motion carried 5-0). B. PUBLIC HEARING: Variance (Sideyard Setback) Shoreland Permit. (David Schwarz) Mayor Dunn opened up the public hearing at 9:1.0 p.m. in the City Council chambers. David Schwarz has applied for a Shoreland Permit to construct a replacement garage for his existing detached garage which is in poor condition. The garage will. be located at 10961 32nd Street North and is along the north shore of Lake Elmo. The size of the proposed garage 38' x 26' is to house two cars (his Ford truck would not fit in a 24 SF garage) and carpenter equipment. Schwarz gave the following reasons for the garage location: If it was in another location this would ruin his big yard and it would require a great amount of fill to keep the garage at road level, there is a huge tree in the middle of the property, the waterline is right down the middle of the yard and under the new stairs that was just put in, and a drainfield that was installed in 1986. City Engineer Bohrer stated two variances are needed: structure setback from the street could be supported because of the uniqueness of the terrain, it does drop off sharply from the road and at that setback it would be in conformance with the other garages in the neighborhood. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 7 Bohrer had a concern with the sideyard setback, especially with Schwarz giving the hardship, that the garage could not be moved to the east because of the drainfield, was created by the application for such a large garage. Although this garage size 38' x 26' = 988 SF is less than the 1,000 SF accessory structure allowed in the code, the large size may not be appropriate in this small 0.37 acre lot. A more typical size double car garage such as 24' x 24' might be installed without a side yard variance and not interfere with the septic system. Rohrer voiced a great concern for the septic system and the availability of land due to the size of the proposed garage. The soil tests were marginal in 1986 and there was no oversi.zing in the system at all.. Bohrer stated he would not recommend anything that would take away land that might be needed for an alternate site. Mayor Dunn closed the public hearing at 9:25 p.m. Councilman Williams suggested the garage be shorter in the 38' direction which would be north/south, then it could be moved over and not infringe on the drainfiel.d. According to the drawing, a pedestrian door is located on the side near the tree. Williams gave, as an example, his garage that is similarly designed and the door is way behind the tree. Todd suggested he could move the garage more to the center of the lot and would have about: 7' between the wall of the existing garage and the steps. Schwarz would then have 8 1/2', as opposed to the 10' required. Williams would be more inclined to grant a variance of only 1 1/2 feet. Councilman Hunt visited the sight and had a safety concern with garages that are built so close together. Based on the marginal soils, Hunt felt we should preserve sufficient ground for an alternate system. He would be against a sideyard setback variance. Councilman Graves was not opposed to building a garage in the location proposed if it is significantly downsized because he does not feel granting variances is a good policy. The City Engineer stated the drawing that was included in the packet was not drawn to scale as accurately as the drawing that was displayed at the meeting. He suggested a new schematic be submitted showing all of the things that might affect the variance such as: the location of the drainfield and the waterline and what might be an acceptable size garage. Williams emphasized he would like to see the garage moved as far to the east as possible because there is room there to work with and felt this should be measured out very caref.ullly. M/S/P Graves/Hunt - to postpone consideration of the David Schwarz application until a new schematic showing the drainfield and waterline location and an acceptable garage size is submitted. (Motion carried 5-0). LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 8 C. Shoreland Permit & Variance Tom Scheuerman, 3077 Klondike Avenue N. The Tom and Jean Scheuerman residence at 3077 Klondike Avenue was destroyed by fire. Section 301.050B.5., requires that whenever a structure is damaged beyond 50% of its replacement cost, the reconstruction shall conform to the Zoning Ordinance. Because this lot is a Lakeshore lot, the Shoreland regulations apply. The Scheuermans own Lots 6 and 7, Ruth's First Addition. The combined lot area above the Ordinary High Water Mark is 2.2 acres which exceeds the minimum requirement of 1-1/2 acres of a Recreational. Development Lake. According to VBWD record, the lake elevation was 884.8. Using this elevation and contour map furnished when Ruth's First Addition was platted, it appeared to the City Engineer that the structure setback was 50-55' from the OHW (elevation 886), where 100' is required. It also appeared the drainfield setback from the High Flood mark (elevation 891) is 25' where 75' is required. A site plan for the reconstruction had been submitted for the City Engineer's review. Comments are found in his letter, dated January 17, 1.989, to the City Council. The site plan submitted shows the lake elevation on November 10, 1.988 incorrectly at 890.3. Variances are required for: 1.) structure setback from the OHW of 55' where 100' is required; and 2) drainfield setback from the High Flood Mark. of 25' where 75' is required. The applicants builder, Jim Hagstrom, stated the hardship was the topography of the lots. Bohrer reported that a high ridge runs in a north -south direction through this subdivision and creates the only buildable area on the lots. The house and drainfields are proposed to be located on this ridge. Mayor Dunn and Councilman Hunt had visited the site and found this is the only location for the house. The Council decided there was sufficient room for an alternate drainfield site, the new house would not increase the non -conformity, and a public hearing was set for receiving input from the neighbors on the requested variances. The following motion was made so as to not to hold up the Scheuermans from having a place to live. M/S/P Graves/Williams - Based on the hardship being the topography of the lots (this is the only buildable site on the lot), the Council approved the application for a building permit for Tom and Jean Scheuerman to build a house at 3077 Klondike Avenue; contingent upon a public hearing being held on February 7th for the shoreland permit and variances. (Motion carried 5-0). 8. Discussion with Property Owners within MUSA Section 32/33 property owners were sent a letter from the City inviting them to attend the meeting to work out reasonable alternatives for development of their property. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 9 Bob Dreher., Section 32 landowner., asked what alternatives would the City offer them for sewer and water improvements for this land. They felt, without these services, they cannot sell. their land for commercial development because they are unable to find buyers willing to forgo the missing services. At this time, the remaining Section 32 propertyowners have a signed petition requesting annexation to the City of Oakdale. Kit Richardson of Griffith Real Estate commented that while nearby freeways make Section 32 a good commercial site, the land is not necessarily easy to sell. He has been working with a company that is considering a 125,000 SF corporate headquarters and Lake Elmo is their first choice. He is also working with a developer who may build that facility for them and will be coming to the City asking what will the: City do for us. Richardson added, that the developer commented "Why should we look at land in Lake Elmo when we can go to Oakdale and build tomorrow?". David Johnson, ConnCo Shoes, explained they have been involved in discussion and meetings for seven years with the City and are still sitting in exactly the same place today after all this effort. Johnson added, that nobody is trying to change their address for the sake of changing their address, but are recognizing the economic potential of this property and are saying we need some help to be competitive. Councilman Williams asked the propertyowners "what are you going to throw into the bargain?" He was not willing right now to put in sewer without some contribution from the landowners. He would like to establish some middleground and identify what help is needed. He has not seen any proposed developments brought to the City for their consideration. Richardson responded that the problem is landowners are not developers. He asked the Council if they can politically reverse the so-called mandate of the last election. "Can you catch up and become competitive?" Williams answered he has always favored dense development in Section 32 within the MUSA Line. Hunt added Lake Elmo does not want to be another Oakdale, but felt we offered something better than Oakdale in terms of terrain there, the access and population in the area and it is not a hodgepodge community like Oakdale is becomming. Bob Dreher and David Johnson suggested the City ask themselves if they want to go through all the work and put the City at risk for 400-500 acres out of the thousands of acres they represent. If they do not have the support of the community, then why are they putting themselves at any risk for such a disproportionate amount of the community. If the City wants to have good, quality development, they have to go out and create this atmosphere. They see a real problem with this happening, partly based on the philosophy portrayed from the last election. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 10 The Council explained the City is taking a proactive role and want to ( see the City work with the landowners to see what can be done. They are in the process of selecting professional expertise such as a City Planner and a financial expert that are willing to work and advise them on how we should proceed to see how Section 32 can be utilized or developed. After the selction of a City Planner and Financial Consultant at the February 7th Council meeting, City Administrator Morrison will contact the landowners/representatives with some feasible and reasonable alternatives to work together on developing an action plan. M/S/P Williams/Graves - to amend the agenda with consideration of Item No. 11. Cimarron based on the number of interested people in attendance. (Motion carried 5--0). 9. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: A. 1989 Capital Improvements City Engineer Sohrer reported it was appropriate to review the City's 1989 Capital Improvement Program and his recommendations are listed in his January 11, 1989 letter. M/S/P Graves/Moe - resolved that Resolution No. 89-11, Ordering Preparation of Report for 15th Street is hereby approved. (Motion carried 5-0). M/S/P Graves/Moe -- resolved that Resolution No. 89-12, Ordering Preparation of Report for 20th Street, from CSAH 17 to Manning is hereby approved. (Motion carried 5-0). M/S/P Graves/Moe - resolved that Resolution No. 89-13, Ordering Preparation of Report for Layton Avenue and 36th St., from TH5 to Laverne is hereby approved. (Motion carried 5--0). M/S/P Graves/Moe - resolved that Resolution No. 89-14, Ordering Preparation of Report for 38th and 39th Street, east of Ideal is hereby approved. (Motion carried 5-0). M/S/P Graves/Moe - resolved that the Council hereby approves Maintenance and Repair of the well pump at an estimated cost of $5,000. (Motion carried 5-0). 10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: A. 1-94 Resolution Resolution 89-3 was submitted to Council on January 3rd for determination by Council that the Resolution should be reviewed by the City Attorney. The amended resolution from the attorney was provided for Council consideration. M/S/ Graves/Moe - to approve Resolution 89-3; with exclusion of (#10) paragraph, "FURTHER...." LAKE EL110 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 11 Discussion proceeded on whether this tenth paragraph should be excluded. The fifth paragraph was changed, for clarification, to read: WHEREAS, Interstate I-94 currently serves as a natural So. boundary line of LE and a natural No, boundary line of. Woodbury; and M/S/P Hunt/Williams - to amend the motion to include the amendment in paragraph #5 and to add the #1.0 paragraph. (Motion carried 3-2 Graves/Moe). M/S/P Graves/Moe -• to approve Resolution 89-3; A Resolution for the City of Lake Elmo Regarding the Proposed Detachment of I-94 Properties from the City of Lake Elmo and Annexed to the City of Woodbury; to include the amendments in paragraph 05 and add #10 paragraph. (Motion carried 4-1 Moe). 11. Cimarron Request (Councilman Don Moe) Mike Zielinski and Floyd Olson, APAC representatives, asked Council support of a resolution supporting a bill which would give manufactured home park residents the first right to purchase their park. M/S/P Graves/Williams - to postpone consideration of resolution Presented until the City Attorney has made his review available for the February 7th Council meeting. (Motion carried 5-0). Park residents brought up their concern on house numbers, size, inability to find them, and asked for reflective signage on their homes for fire prevention purposes. Fire Chief- Fran Pott was contacted for input and wrote a letter endorsing this application. The residents had other concerns on the health, safety and welfare (maintaining/repairing walkways) and have submitted petitions to NHD. Dan Krawczyk, NHD, stated all petitions have not been presented to NFID, and when they are, NHD will respond to them. The Council encouraged communication between APAC and NHD. Councilmen Graves and Hunt stated their interest in attending meetings if need be. The Council also asked the City Attorney to summarize what power and options the City had with enforcement of the rights of the homeowners in the park. M/S/P Williams/Hunt- - to direct the City Attorney to render an opinion on the legislation authorizing owners of manufactured housing located in mobile home parks to have a first right of purchase upon sale of the park and summarize what power a municipality has on enforcing reflective house numbering and walkway repair. (Motion carried 5-0). 12. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: M/S/P Williams/Graves - due to the meeting running so late, Items 12A., 1.2C., and 12E. will be postponed until the February 7th Council meeting. (Motion carried 5-0), LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE-12 A. Planning Commission Recommendations: PZ Meeting Dates B. City Administrator Contract This matter was continued from the January 3rd meeting, as the Council did not receive a copy of the Contract. The City Attorney has reviewed the contract. Councilman Williams suggested changing: "administrator is employed for an indefinite term" to "employed for a 1 year term". The City Attorney advised the Council that the insertion of the word "indefinite" was to the City's benefit. Williams commented he had no feelings, one way or the other, if the $100 car allowance was appropriate in Lake Elmo. He suggested the Administrator keep a log of driving expenses for 3 or 4 months to see if a $100 car allowance is adequate. Then based on the log, the Council would make a determination. M/No Second Williams/ -• to request the City Administrator compile a car expense log for three months and present this to the Council, then the Council will determine the allowance for the future. M/S/P Graves/Moe - resolved that the Contract, between the City of Lake Elmo, and City Administrator Patricia Morrison, is hereby approved. (Motion carried 5-0). C. U.S. Olympic Festival --Discussion D. Workshop for City Council and City Administrator Councilman Williams felt there was a need for a workshop in order to smooth out some rough spots, which he had previously referred to in a memo he had written. Councilman Graves had no problem with a workshop, but wanted to know what topics would be discussed. Williams added, the Planning Commission also had concerns on procedure. Councilman Moe responded his concern wasn't with the Administrator's performance, but with the Planning Commission. Moe asked for the concerns in writing because if he felt the concerns were not justified, he would not attend the meeting. With this comment, he called for adjournment and left the meeting. Administrator Morrison welcomed a workshop, asked the topics to be prioritized, because once these concerns can be resolved, we can concentrate our energies on City business. A workshop meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, January 25th, 12 noon at City Hall. M/S/P Hunt/Williams - to adjourn the City Council meeting at 11:55 p.m. (Motion carried 4-0). . .............. Resolution No. 89-11 Order Preparation of Report for 15th St, " 89-12 " " " " for 20th St. 89-13 " " " " for Layton Ave. & 36th St. " 89-14 " for 38th & 39th St. CLAIMS TO BE APPROVED AT JANUARY 17, 1989 LAKE ELMO COUNCIL MEETING (all claims are within budget unless otherwise noted) Paper Warehouse - paper products for party 1/13 S 48.71 thru Park Shelter workers (skating rink) 407.23 Rose Floral & Greenhouse - Plant - Bob Wier (mother's death) 33.45 Bellaire Sanitation - office dumnster 53.82 American Typewriter- Office supplies 49.84 State Treasurer - 4th Quarter building surcharge collected 551.46 City of North St. Paul - 1 month Animal Control Vehicle usage 165.00 TKDA - Engineering (invoice enclosed) General $ 1,533.25 Pass Thru 1,912.34 201 Sewer 1;857.43 MSA 171.85 5-474.87 VBWD - rights -of -way assessment - Project 1005 1,174.68 Voto, Tautges, C.P.A. - Interim audit services for 1988 2,539.00 Frank Langer - monthly Assessor payment 1,000.00 EMED Co. - Fire Dept, supplies 41.81 General Communications - Fire Dept, supplies 49.30 Streicher's - Fire Dept, supplies 32.45 Mid -Central, Inc. - Fire Dent, supplies - 130..00 Motorola, Inc. Fire Dept, personnel transport radio 320.00 Russell Cromey - Fire Dept, safety glasses 64.50 Jim Weber Inc. -Fire hall repair 690.00 Elmo's Lumber & Plywood - Fire hall maint. 2.72 Window Warehouse - Fire Station windows 249.00 Lake Elmo Repair - Fire Dept, truck repair 187.00 Peoples Plus - Fire Dept, gas 22.00 Lake Elmo Oil - Bldg. InsD. $ 80.01 Fire Dept. 108.86 Maint. Dept. 51.11 239.98 Airsignal - Maint. Dept, radio 129.00 Truck Utilities - replace Hoist on Mike's trk.(emergency' repair - approved by Pat M.) 2,994.00 J. Shiely Co. - Salt/sand in December 1,833.61 Battery & Tire Warehouse - Maint. Dept. parts & repair 36.52 AT & T Maint. Dept, telephone - 1.55 Klawitter Tree Service - Cottonwood removal inc. stump 901.00 Hardware Hank - Fire Dept. $ 34.48 Maint. Dept. 75.89 110.37 Thompson Hardware - Maint. DeDT.-Tup ies 77.91 Best Locking Systems - keys for Park Shelter 57.59 Metro Waste Control - Monthly Sewer Service charge 81.33 American !dater Works Assn. - Water Fund dues 28.00 Minn. Dept. of Health-15 moo analysis of City Water 162.26 thru' January 27th payroll 10,118.37 Total $ 30,058.33 t 10. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: A. I-94 Resolution 11. Cimarron Request (Councilman Don Moe) 12. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: A. Planning Commission Recommendations: PZ Meeting Dates B. City Administrator Contract C. U.S. Olympic Festival --Discussion 13. Adjourn FUTURE MEETINGS: Ja.n. 23 7:30 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting Jan. 24 7:00 p.m. Special Council. Meeting Feb. 6 7:00 p.m. Parks Committee Meeting Feb. 7 7:00 p.m. City Council Meeting Feb. 13 7:30 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting Feb. 21 7:00 p.m. City Council. Meeting Feb. 27 7:30 p.m. Planning Commission Meeting Sundays REAPP Meeting