Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 1995/10/23APPROVED ~ . ~ PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, bI]INNESOTA Regular Meeting October 23, 1995 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor Linee at 7:00 p. m. on October 23, 1995. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Linee, Council members Trade, Hankner Blanchard and Quick ALSO PRESENT: Samantha Orduno, City Administrator, Paul Harrington, Community Development Coordinator, Don Brager, Finance Director There were no additions to the agenda for this meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Council member Trade noted a change to the October 9, 1995 minutes; Page 3, Lines 33, shoµld be changed from "with" to "width". MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Trade to Approve the. Regular Council Meeting Minutes from October 9, 1995 AS AMENDED. Council member Blanchazd stated she would abstain from voting as she was not present at the October 9, 1995 Council meeting. V TE• 4 ayes 0 nays 1 Abstain Motion Carried • ~J There were no Advisory Commission minutes to accept at this meeting. ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES: SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: Samantha Orduno, City Administrator formally announced her resignation as City Administrator for Mounds View, effective November 25, 1995. She stated she has accepted a position with the City of Carpenteria, CA as City Manager. She took this opportunity to read her letter of resignation and to thank council members, staff and residents for making her four years with the City of Mounds View so pleasurable. Mayor Linke thanked Ms. Orduno for her dedicated service and stated it was a pleasure to work with her. Council member Trude thanked Ms. Orduno for bringing such an openness to the city and government. She noted that Samantha always took the time necessary to respond to concerns and questions addressed by the residents. The council members congratulated Ms. Orduno on her new position. MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Blanchard to accept Ms. Orduno's resignation as City Administrator, effective November 25, 1995. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carved MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Trude to authorize an RFP for a Search Firm and appoint Mr. Paul Harrington as Interim City Administrator until someone is selected for the position. 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried CONSENT AGENDA: Ms. Orduno read the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Set a Public Hearing for 7:OS p.m., December 11, 1995, to Consider Certification of Delinquent Utility Bills, Tree Removal and Weed Removal Invoices to Ramsey County for Collection with 1996 Property Taxes. B. Adopt Resolution No. 4829 Approving the Recycling Grant Request to Ramsey County and Authorizing Acceptance of Any Allocated Funding. C. Approve Declaration of Surplus Office Furniture. D. Adopt Resolution 4831, Approving Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds. E. .Licenses for Anvroval: General -Commercial Adkins Construction -Renewal Wayne Brekken dba Board and Room Building -New HVAC A-ABC Appliance & Heating, Inc. -New MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Blanchazd to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried RESIDENTS REQUESTS AND COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR: Mayor Linke explained that this portion of the meeting was designated for anyone who wished to speak to the Council on items that were not on the Agenda. , There were no comments from the floor. • PUBLIC HEARINGS: To Consider a Rec~iest for Rezoning.~ry Krig/Fran DeGross. Mayor Linke opened the Public Hearing at 7:10 p. m. Mr. Paul Harrington, Community Development Director, explained that Gary Krig, owner of 5497 Adams Street, had made an application on behalf of Fran DeGross to rezone his property which is currently zoned B-2, Limited Business to B-3, Highway Commercial. Mr. DeGross has entered into a purchase agreement with Mr. Krig, contingent upon the city's approval of the rezoning. Mr. DeGross would like to locate and operate a minor automotive repair facility on the site. Mr. Harrington stated the Mounds View Municipal Code spells out five criteria upon which the Council will base their decision for any rezoning. These aze as follows: 1) Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan; 2) Geographical area involved; 3) Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the azea in which it is proposed; 4) The character of the surrounding azea; and 5) The demonstrated need for such use. • Mr. Harrington stated that the Mounds View Planning Commission reviewed this request at their September 20, 1995 meeting and have recommended denial, based upon its inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan. This was also reviewed by the council at their work session on October 2nd. Mr. DeGross explained that as stated eazlier, he would like to open an automotive and light truck repair shop. He does not intend to have junk cars sitting around the lot. He plans to service eight to ten cars per day which he does not feel will cause a great problem in traffic in the area. If any cars are not repaired and picked up during the day, they will likely be in the garage overnight. He recycles all of the shops repair products. He has licensed dealers who pick up tires, used oil filters, scrap metal. He feels the city has a need for the services he can perform there. JoEllen Cummins, 5479 Adams Street, asked how late the operation would be open. Mr. DeGross stated it would be open from 8 a. m. to 6 p. m. , five days per week. Ms. Cummins stated she does not understand where the cars would be parked as there is not much room on the lot. Mr. Harrington explained that, for public clarification, the public hearing this evening was just for a request to rezone the property. The use itself requires a Conditional • Use Permit within that specific zoning that they are requesting. Because the rezoning would be required first, it was decided to go forwazd with that and then judge the merits of the CUP following the decision on the rezoning rather than bring them forwazd together. If the rezoning takes place, there will be additional meetings to discuss how the operation will be conducted, how materials will be stored, hours of operation, etc. Mayor Linke noted that the proposed site is included in one part of a building. He wondered if it was all on one lot. Mr. Harrington explained that the gas station is on a separate lot. However, the property as it is legally described has two frontages, one is on Adams Street and one is on County Rd. I. It is an L-shaped property that fronts both on Adams Street and Co. Rd. I. Any rezoning would rezone the entire parcel. Mayor Linke asked if the property would all be owned or if it would be leased out. Mr. DeGross stated he would be leasing- it. Mr. Krig would still own the property. Jack Koutsostamatis, 5385 Raymond Avenue, stated he lives approximately four blocks from the property. He stated his family has been in Mounds View since 1954 and he has used various car mechanics up and down Highway 10 over the years. Mr. • DeGross was a mechanic over at the Phillips station and he has known him for fifteen yeazs. He stated there is not a more fair and honest mechanic and he would love to have him four blocks away where he would get his car repaired in a competent and reasonable manner, As far as he knows the Saturn dealership is newer and they only service newer cars. There is no other service garage in the area. He would love to have him in the area. Mrs. Koutsostamatis, 5385 Raymond Avenue stated she does not understand why there would be any objection to rezoning the property. Mayor Linke explained that in order to rezone the property, the council must follow the criteria that the city has established. It was asked if other residents in the area had voiced any objection to the rezoning. Ms. Trude stated she understood there were some phone calls to city hall in regard to this item. Mr. Harrington explained that the calls that came in were from residents who requested information about the rezoning and what exactly was being proposed.. He did not receive any other comments. Mr. DeGross stated he talked with the minister at the church across from the site and both his congregational members and himself wished to remain neutral on the issue. Tim Schmidt, 5446 Erickson Road, asked what other potential businesses could be placed in this building if the repair shop were not approved. Mr. Harrington explained that Mounds View has four commercial zoning districts. B-1 is the most restrictive. B-3 allows for gas stations, fast food with drive throughs, so it essentially gets more into the highway type commercial uses. The existing gas station on the parcel is anon-conforming use, however the station was there when the property was zoned B-2, so it was "grandfathered in". Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 7:20 p. m MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Hanker to approve Resolution 4832, Denying the Rezoning Request by Gary Krig/Fran DeGross. Ms. Trude explained that the major concern in rezoning this property is that it is a commitment by the city to allow a different type of business to operate. It opens the door to any type of business allowed by the new zoning. The B-3 zoning allows for fast food businesses and other high traffic generating businesses and that is the reason the city Planning Commission has selected those businesses to be located on a highway. There aze not any businesses of this type on the county roads at this point. If the mechanic business did not prosper or if the lease were terminated, the owner could allow other uses to come in that may not be as desirable to the neighborhood. The rezoning does not fit into the city's Comprehensive Plan of development of what the Planning Commission would like to see for the City of Mounds View. There aze also several other options for this business to locate on Highway 10. They have to be located in an azea where they do not impact a residential neighborhood in a harmful way. Mayor Linke stated he would have to speak against the motion. He feels four business zones for the City of Mounds View is too many. Mounds View is the only city in the metro azea that zones in this way. 1fie only thing of the five items that he finds a problem with is (1) Relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan. The closest single family/ residential area is across Co. Rd. I which hits their back yards. He also looks at the need for the area. He therefore, cannot support this resolution, denying the rezoning request. Ms. Blanchard stated she knows Mr. DeGross and he is a very good mechanic. She has no objection to him and his business, but she cannot support this because of the location. She does not feel highway business should be in a residential area. This is basically a residential azea as it is across from the church and there are apartments behind it. Mr. Quick stated he supports the motion, based on the relationship to Municipal Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Trude stated there is amulti-family dwelling unit almost directly behind the site and she knows an operation of this type can be noisy at times. Many of the family members in the building work different shifts. She reminded residents that this application is granting the rezoning to the person who owns the land, not to the man who wants to lease the property. V TE• 4 ayes 1 nay (Linke) Motion Carries COUNCIL BUSINESS: A. Consideration of Request for Reconsideration of Planning Case No. 415-95, Glenn Hazstad: Mr.. Harrington explained that at the September 11, 1995 meeting, the Council approved a 'Conditional Use Permit amendment .for Mr. Harstad. The amendment allowed the Suds & Shine Caz Wash to have an attendant on duty only four hours per day. The 24 hour operation was not approved or included in the Conditional Use Permit amendment. Mr. McDonald, the attorney representing the Suds & Shine Caz Wash, contacted Mr. Thompson, the City Attorney, requesting that the item be reconsidered at the council level. Mr. Malcolm McDonald explained that there were two reasons they were asking for reconsideration. One of these was the issue of fairness; the other is that the modifications that aze being sought by Mr. Hazstad would be subject to a probationary period (whether six months or 1 yeaz). Mr. McDonald explained that the initial permit was issued in favor. of Ronald Richardson, the current owner. He applied in eazly 1985 and the council approved the application for a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a Suds & Shine Caz Wash in September 1985. That was too late in the year to construct and open the car wash so it was finally opened in 1986. About the same time as he opened, there was another application before the city to open a Wash Me Car Wash, and the city approved it without limits as to the hours of operation, permitting it to be open 24 hours/day. That approval also did not require that an attendant be on duty at all times that the car wash was open (it was limited to 4 hours per day). Mr. McDonald explained that about two years ago, the FINA station sought approval to install a full service car wash and it was. approved with a 24- hour/day operation. This property is, as he understands, closer to an apartment building that the Suds & Shine Caz Wash is to the adjacent single family residences. FINA does more business that the Suds & Shine and also is noisier. There are now four full-service wash bays that aze open 24 hours per day. The Suds & Shine is the only car wash along Highway 10 that has a limit on the hours of operation. Mr. Harstad has entered onto a purchase agreement with Mr. Richardson, contingent upon the city modifying the Conditional Use Permit to allow the Suds & Shine to be open 24 hours and also to eliminate the requirement that the attendant be present at all times during operation. His request is to allow him to compete fairly with the other Mounds View car washes that are open 24 hours per day. Mr. Harstad has agreed to modify the placing of signs throughout the facility referring to the Mounds View Sound Ordinance, to insulate the vacuums, and to shut off the vacuums at 10:00 p. m. He also agreed to install trees pursuant to the applicable codes. Most importantly, he has agreed to have the issue revisited by the City Council in 6-12 months. He stated he would like to hear comments and concerns from the public in regazd to the proposal, so modifications could be made if necessary. Mayor Linke stated the council voted to approve the application three to two. The approval, however required afour-fifths vote. In order to reconsider the vote, those who voted against the motion would have to ask for that reconsideration. He further explained that comparing the Suds & Shine to the Wash Me Caz Wash is not a fair comparison as Suds & Shine is located in a residential area and the Wash Me Caz Wash is located in a commercial area. Mr. Thompson, City Attorney, stated he had an opportunity to review the tape from the September 11 meeting and looked at the letter from Mr. McDonald. It is his feeling that the City Council does have the discretion whether or not they want to approve or deny the amendment. The procedure to follow in changing their original decision would be to have the two City Council members who voted against it ask to have the issue reconsidered. Ms. Hankner stated she would not be in support of reconsideration of the request. Nothing has changed that would make her change her decision, and the staff memo outlines all the reason for her decision. Mr. Quick stated he also agrees with the five points in the staff memo. He does not feel there is any need. to reconsider this item. Mayor Linke stated there was not any interest shown by the Council members to reconsider this request therefore it would not be reconsidered. B. Presentation of Proposed 1996 City Budget: Ms. Samantha Orduno welcomed the residents to the city' 1996 budget informational meeting. She stated this meeting was to provide an opportunity for residents to give input and for the council to re-evaluate concerns expressed by residents prior to approval of the 1996 budget. She noted there were a number of factors influencing the budget and she briefly went through the list. These included Council direction fora 0 % levy increase, continued Federal mandates, increased paper costs, closing of Ramsey County's New Brighton Court, pending computer link to Ramsey County Dispatch, proposed construction of the Highway 10 pedestrian bridge and unknown tax capacity and~property tax revenues from Ramsey County. Ms. Orduno stated in order to continue the same services that the city has had in 1995 and not increase the levy, the Council had to make the following expenditure reductions: capital equipment purchases were delayed or eliminated, anew employee health plan was devised which saved the city approximately $15,000, new programs were added, no new staff except for federally subsidized Community Oriented Policing Officer, non replacement of staff including the Assistant position. She noted that the Recycling Coordinator position was combined with an existing position. There was also the elimination of the subsidy to the Golf Course operations. Ms. Orduno proceeded to go through the process in which the budget was prepared. She noted that in August staff was directed to add a line item to the Budget fora 3 % levy increase to possibly help fund a portion of the City's costs of the. proposed pedestrian bridge. She noted that this can either be removed or it can remain in the budget. Also added at that time was a 3 line item inflation factor added due to the uncertainty of final tax revenues from Ramsey County. She noted that this factor will most noticeably come out altogether. In September the city did certify a proposed levy to Ramsey County with a 6 % increase (3 % possibly for the pedestrian bridge and 3 % for an uncertainty factor). Ms. Orduno noted that the Council will meet at a November 6th work session to re-evaluate the budget, based upon the input at the informational meeting. The Truth in Taxation Hearing will be held on November 29, 1995. On December 6, 1995, the City Council will formally adopt the budget. Mr. Don Brager, Finance Director took this opportunity to go through the budget figures with the residents. Mayor Linke presented tax capacity rate comparisons for the City of Mounds View for the past three years as well as an example of the taxes on an average home within the city. He also compared the tax capacity rates in Mounds View with those of other metropolitan cities and in doing so found that, per capita, Mounds View charges its residents less for the same services they provide. Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, noted that it is the value of the home and not the number of people within the home that makes the difference. He stated he had several questions from the information which was sent to residents in regard to the budget. He wondered why the debt service on the golf course, as listed on pg. 7, was not included on the regular debt service schedule with the other debt service funds. The debt service fund schedule on pg. 14 gives more detail that what is found on pg. 7. He would like the golf schedule over the debt service schedule before the TNT and provide the additional information. He would also like to see some balances in terms of how much is owed after 1996 payment schedules on the debt service bonds. On Exhibit D on page 11, he wondered why there was an even increase of $10,000 for legal fees. Mayor Linke stated at this time the city is going out for RFPs on legal services and the staff does not know what costs will come in. They have assumed that there will likely be an increase in the legal fees primarily because the court house has been moved from New Brighton to Maplewood. The increase is based on "per hour" increases in terms of what the market will be for attorney fees. Mr. McCarty stated he was on the last committee that dealt with the courthouse when he was on the county board and he is dismayed that some commitments were not kept on that issue. He feels there is enough documentation to clearly state it was the understanding that there would be no movement until the central location had been finalized and that prior to the central location, the county would still have New Brighton court and Maplewood court in operation. He believes that was agreed to by himself, the other two commissioners that served on that committee and the representatives from the court. • Mayor Linke stated unfortunately when they changed the law in 1991 or 1992, that information did not get put in so the decision was basically left up to the judges. In regard to the Central Services, Mr. McCarty stated he noted a 14 9b increase. He asked why this was proposed. Ms. Orduno stated the city is in the process of purchasing some new equipment on a lease purchase and they aze also experiencing an increase in paper costs. For the past three years, general office supplies was kept at the same level. This has been increased to be more consistent with what the city is actually spending. Also, $2,000 has been budgeted for recodification which has not been done in the past. Mr. McCarty noted that Public Safety has some significant changes or rearrangements. He wondered what is going on in that department. Mayor Linke stated in prior years, all of the chief s time was in Administration. Now some of the Lieutenant's time has also been put into Administration. It basically is just a shift in the areas of funding. Ms. Orduno noted that there is also $11,000 in the budget for the new Police Officer who will be a designated community-oriented policing off cer in Crime Intervention. There is not a significant shift in terms of services. Mr. McCarty asked about the 57 % increase in the snow and ice removal for streets and highways. Ms. Orduno stated again what he is seeing is a shift of personnel. Staff has taken a close look at what programs were doing which activities and the cost and then they shifted some of the personnel into the actual programs that they aze spending time in. Mayor Linke stated the figures also take into account the city's taking over of the plowing that the county did. The city is in a contract now with the county and the city will be plowing those streets and receiving a reimbursement from the county. Therefore, it will also show up as a revenue from the county. Mr. McCarty asked about the pazk maintenance and repair decrease of 37 % . He asked if the residents would see a deterioration in the parks. Ms. Orduno noted that the city has a lot of new equipment so the costs take into consideration the decrease in equipment repair. • Mr. McCarty asked about the 18 % increase in the general contingency. Additionally, there is a new "Contingency -Council" fund. He wondered how these two figures compare with last year. Ms. Orduno stated this is where the pedestrian bridge was incorporated. Mr. Brager, Finance Director, stated the debt service funds for the water fund and the golf course fund are listed separately, as it is a state requirement. Julie Olson, 2663 Lake Court Circle, stated she has some questions in regard to the Estimated Market Value Change graph on pg. 47. She wondered what the determining factor of no change for homes versus the homes that did change. The biggest factor only attributed to 1 % to 5 % of the homes. Mayor Linke stated that all market values are done by the county. Mr. Brager noted that the table reflects the 1996 figures. Ms. Olson stated she understood that city has not obtained the final numbers from Ramsey County yet, so therefore, she assumes that the graph represents only their estimations. . Ms. Orduno stated yes, it changes weekly. The city may not receive the final figures from the county until after the levy is certified. Ms. Olson asked if the determination on the percentage of increase is made by Ramsey County, why does the city submit a proposed percentage increase in order for them to make the determination. Mayor Linke stated this is state law. The state requires that it be provided to the county to show the maximum amount that the city will levy. This number can decrease but it cannot increase. Ms. Olson asked what percentage of levy increase was proposed to the county last year. Mayor Linke stated it was approximately 5 % last year. The increase actually amounted to only 2.5 %. Ms. Orduno reminded Ms. Olson that property value and the levy are two entirely different things. The county does not care what the city's levy is. They come in and do an evaluation based upon a formula as to what property values will be. It does not matter what the city will be doing in terms of the levy. In regazd to the proposed pedestrian bridge, Ms. Olson asked if the remaining 20 X that is not covered by the grant will all be assumed by the residents. Mayor Linke responded no, the 3 % which was added into the budget will only raise approximately $46,000. The other funds will come out of the street light utility fund and the franchise fees. Ms. Olson asked what it will take in order for the council to decide against the pedestrian bridge. Mayor Linke stated he has received only a few calls and one letter in opposition to the bridge. The work sessions that the council has had have been very positive. He noted however, that the council needs to hear from the residents in regazd to their feelings about the proposal. Ms. Hanlrner stated she has had heard many people talk in opposition of the bridge. She has had only one call in favor of it. She is not sure where the people live who support the proposal. She stated she is still inclined to support a zero percent tax increase and if the residents show an overwhelming support of the bridge, she would like to see something dropped from the budget to allow for it. Ms. Trude stated the main purpose of the bridge is to allow safe transportation for the children across the highway as well as provide a link for the bike trail system. There are people in the senior center without vehicles who would like to patronize the businesses on the other side of the highway. This would provide them with a safe alternative to crossing a busy roadway. She stated the people that she has talked to not only feel it is a safety issue but also an enhancement to the city. Ms. Olson asked if a study has been done to determine how faz from the azea the kids who will use the bridge actually are. Ms. Trude stated this is part of the proposal that the engineers offered. Ms. Olson pointed out that the residents could end up with a 3 % levy on the property taxes prior to any feasibility studies even being done. The decision would be made prior to the studies. Mayor Linke stated yes, the money will be used to do the engineering studies. Ms. Trude stated before the Council's last work session 500 letters went out to inform some of the area residents what was being proposed. She stated that letters were signed by about 20 people in favor of the bridge. These letters only resulted in one phone call against the bridge. • Ms. Hankner stated she is still inclined to say that she wants to vote fora 0 % levy increase. If there is a lot of support for the bridge, she would vote to have it replace another lute item on the budget as she feels there are a lot of people in the city who cannot afford to have a tax increase. Mayor Linke took this opportunity to read a letter he had received from Mr. Gene Wagner, representing the Silver Lake Woods Homeowners Association, dated October 19, 1995. This letter which was signed by the residents stated that the homeowners in the Silver Lake Woods Association would like to see the pedestrian bridge stopped. Gene Wagner, 2647 Lake Court Circle, asked where the pressure came from to pursue the bridge. It sounds as though there was perhaps a lot of pressure from the trailways people and it has expanded from that to include safety issues, etc. Mayor Linke stated it was put in the budget because the council looked at various ways to finance it and it was decided that a 3 9b levy increase was probably the most feasible way to finance it. Mr. Wagner stated there are a lot of residents who do not feel the need to increase taxes for something that they do not feel is necessary. There aze • lots of other things an increase could be used for before a pedestrian bridge. He has not heard one person stand up at the council meeting in support of the bridge, and in comparison he has heard a lot of opposition. Mayor Linke noted that the budget was based on a 0 % increase. If residents want the pedestrian bridge they will let the council know, likewise if they do not want it they will also make it known. Cliff Ash, 2664 Lake Court Drive, stated he is opposed to the bridge. Based upon his calculations, taxes in his azea (based on a $110,000-$120,000 value) will go up between $60 - $85 per yeaz. A lot of the people in the development are "empty nesters" and are on a limited income. To him it looks like it is a "want", not a "must". There are many other things in the city that the money could be used for. Furthermore, let Fridley build a pedestrian bridge on Highway 65, as they have a bigger problem there than Mounds View. Henry Ruggles, 2629 Lake Court Drive, stated the letter from the Mounds View Planning- Commission dated August 16, 1995 which states the commission's support of the bridge does not include two of the commissioners. One name missing is his as he is not in support of the bridge. He asked what the total dollaz amount is for the project. • • Ms. Trude stated the grant amount is $480,000. The City must come up with 209b which is $120,000. Additionally, the engineering fees and the preliminary studies aze $63,000. The total amount of the city's portion is approximately $185,000. Mr. Ruggles stated he understands that the bridge will be designed to allow for wheelchair access. He asked if it is a spiral design. If not, to grade it to a point to make it wheelchair accessible will require a very lengthy ramp. If this is done, will the ramp end up encroaching on other properties? Mayor Linke stated as he understands it, all of it will fit within the Highway 10 Right of Way however all of this will be a part of the feasibility studies. Ms. Trude noted that snow removal will be the only ongoing maintenance expense that is anticipated. It will be constructed with a similar material to sidewalks and will be enclosed as state law mandates. Mr. Ruggles asked if the bridge would be open 24 hours per day. He would think there would be concerns about liability if it were. He also asked if anyone has been contacted from the state highway department to see if the lights could be tied in for pedestrian crossing with appropriate signage. Mayor Linke stated yes, they were contacted several yeazs ago and at that time they would not agree to do this. The last time they were in to the council's work session they said they would revisit the issue, but they have not responded. Mr. Ruggles stated he has not seen many people going across that intersection. He goes by the azea all the time. He feels that if the bridge is made wheelchair accessible, it will bring in skateboards and in-line skaters who will use the azea. He just cannot see how a project of this type should be "allowed to fly" . Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated the estimated mazket value of properties is based upon sales comparisons in the area. There are other givens also as people can contest their estimated market value administratively, and then can appeal it after that. Arden Wahlberg, 2642 Lake Court Drive, stated he is against the bridge concept. He hopes that the Council does not think that because no one is stating their opposition, that they aze .for it. That is simply not the case. The school attendance areas are laid out in accordance to having to cross highway 10. If coming across the roadway is a serious problem they should get on the bus and ride it rather than walking. He thinks the Central Avenue pedestrian bridge is an eyesore and finds that many of the pedestrians don't cross it, but rather wait and cross with the light. With the many requirements for • wheelchair accessibility, it even becomes a greater eyesore. Mayor Linke stated according to his calculations, for every foot in height, the ramp must go out twelve feet for wheelchair accessibility. Mr. Wahlberg stated this would involve a tremendous distance and he cannot see that wheelchair bound residents will even use it. It will attract nuisance, with graffiti, etc. He feels the proposal should be put on a vote for residents showing what it will cost them in taxes. Ms. Trude explained that kids who use the bus service often aze involved in other school activities before and after school hours. Also there aze kids involved in summer swimming that need to cross the highway during the summer months. She talked with members of the PTA who stated they would tell their kids that it is the only way they will be allowed to cross the highway. As far as designing the structure, there should be sufficient funds available to do something that would be appealing. A public committee of residents could be arranged to come up with suggestions to the engineer. Ms. Hankner reminded residents that on November 29, 1995 there will be a Public Hearing on the budget. On December 6, 1995, the council will actually vote on the budget. Ms. Blanchazd stated she has been asked how the pedestrian bridge can be stopped or promoted. Regazdless of whether a resident is in favor or in opposition to the bridge, they must discuss the issue with neighbors, write letters to the editor, and attend the public hearings. She stated she personally does not feel that Mounds View can afford the bridge but if the majority of the people want it to be put on their taxes, they must let the council know. Carol Golden, 2749 Lakepoint Drive, stated she understands that this has become a safety issue. However, 25 yeazs ago Highway 10 did not even have traffic signals. The traffic lights were put in for safety. Mr. Brager noted that in mid-November a Truth in Taxation will be mailed out to the residents. C. Consideration of Resolution No. 4830, Approving the Affirmative Action Plan. Ms. Orduno stated that the Affirmative Action Plan has been updated, and upon approval will be submitted to the Department of Human Rights for recertification. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchazd to approve Resolution No. 4830, Approving the Affirmative Action Plan. • V T' 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried D. Consideration of Request for Amendment to Drainage Plan, Midwest I.V. Mr. Paul Harrington, Community Development Coordinator, explained that the original drainage plan for the proposal was approved and accepted on August 28, 1995. Since that time, an amendment has been submitted which would allow a change in their drainage patterns on their property. Mr. Harrington stated he sent the request to the city engineer for his review and he has found the plan acceptable and that the run off calculations provided are adequate for the site. The two items that staff would recommend including in any motion to amend the original Resolution No. 4800 aze 1) the date on the plans be changed and referenced in the resolution and the development agreement 2) that a letter of understanding from the City of Blaine be obtained and because we will sending run off from the City of Mounds View property into a Blaine system, longtime liability for that should be addressed in the letter. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Hankner to amend Resolution No. 4800, with the following changes: (1) that the date on the plans be changed and in the resolution and development agreement where it refers to the plans and 2) that a letter of understanding be obtained from the City of Blaine. Ms. Hanlrner noted that the council discussed this item in detail at the special session held at 6:00 p.m. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried REPORTS Report of Council members: Quick: No report. Blanchard: No report. Hankner: No Report. Trude: In regazd to the status of the Arsenal meetings, Ms. Trude stated Ms. Diane Wuori is meeting at the Shoreview Community Center to review the plans that are being presented to the public. Ms..Trude attended the meeting held two weeks ago and only about 35 people were in attendance. The general public comments were that they wanted to see even more open space. The committee will be meeting one more time before the final proposal is wrapped up. 2. Report of Mayor Linke: No report. 3. Report of Administrator: No report. Mayor Linke stated the next Council work session will be held on November 6, 1995 at 6:00 p. m. The next Council meeting will be held on November 13, 1995 at 7:00 p. m. He adjourned the Council meeting at 9:45 p. m. Respectfully subs a Tamara D. Saefke ~~+~-~~~r~.C) Recording Secretary • •