Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 1995/11/27Page 1 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 CALL TO ORDER The Mounds View City Council was called to order by Mayor Linke at 7:00 p.m. • on November 27, 1995. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT Mayor Linke, Councilmembers Trude, Blanchard, Hankner and Quick ALSO PRESENT: Paul Harrington, Interim City Administrator ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA: Mr. Harrington stated he would like to add one item to the Agenda, Resolution 4856, regarding Facsimile Signatures. Mayor Linke stated he also would like to add an item to the agenda, discussion on the possibility of Hwy. 610/118 becoming a future tow road. • Page 2 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Council member Trude noted a change to the November 13, 1995 minutes. She noted that Page 3, Line 47 should be changed from Webber to "Weber" as should Page 4, Line 1. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchard to approve the minutes of the November 13, 1995 City Council meeting AS AMENDED. VOTE: 4 ayes 0 nays 1 Abstention (Hankner) Motion Carried ACCEPTANCE OF ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES: There were no Advisory Commission Minutes to be accepted at this meeting. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: There was no Special Order of Business set for this meeting. . CONSENT AGENDA: Mr. Harrington, Interim City Administrator, read the Consent Agenda as follows: A. Adopt Resolution No. 4847, Approving a Step Adjustment for Mark Andrescik, Public Works Maintenance Worker. B. Adopt Resolution 4848, Approving Reclassification of Public Works Leadsman. C. Adopt Resolution No. 4854, Approving Just and Correct Claims Against City Funds. D. Licenses for Approval: HVAC -Expires 6/30/96 Albers Mechanical Services -New Apollo Heating -Renewal Conrad Mechanical Contractors, Inc. -New More's Burner Service -New Southside Plumbing and Heating -New • Page 3 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council Mayor Linke asked if there were any councilmembers who would like any items removed from the Consent Agenda. There were none. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Quick to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried RESIDENTS REQ UESTS AND COMMENTS F ROM 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. Bill Siercks, 2210 Pinewood Drive, asked what the total cost of the pedestrian bridge is estimated to be. Mayor Linke explained that the city will be receiving a $480,000 grant and the city's matching share will be $185,000. • Mr. Siercks said the architectural/engineering fees of approximately $65,000 were not disclosed as part of the city's portion when he inquired as to the project costs over the telephone. He also asked various questions in regard to snow removal, whether or not the costs for removing the drainage ponds and the moving of the traffic signals, if necessary, were included in the estimates, etc. He stated these were all questions that needed to be answered and it was his understanding that the residents would be allowed to give their input in regard to the proposed pedestrian bridge on November 29, 1995. He understood that no decision would be made on this issue before then. Mayor Linke explained that this would have been the case if the project were included as a part of the 1996 budget. However, the city was able to fund their portion from other sources, and therefore it was not necessary to present the residents with an increase in their tax levy for 1996. Locating a funding source for the project was the main concern. He felt very strongly that the funds should not be used from future sources. The proposal he presented to the rest of the council on November 13th was money that the city has in-hand now. Ms. Hankner stated she was not present at the November 13th meeting. She feels this is a fundamental issue of trust. She was in attendance at the last council work session and there was no discussion about .putting this item on the agenda for consideration at the following Council meeting. She was • disappointed to hear after returning from a business trip that action had been Page 4 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council taken on this issue. She also understood that it would be discussed further at the November 29th meeting. She did not have any idea that money would be taken out of the 1995 budget to fund this project. This further raises questions about the city's budget process. She is particularly concerned that a decision was made on this issue without any notice to her. Ms. Trude explained that at the council's last work session, they had agreed that there would be a 0% tax levy increase for 1996. Since that decision was made, she felt it would be inappropriate to discuss the pedestrian bridge issue at the Truth in Taxation Meeting if it was not a part of the 1996 budget. Mayor Linke explained that it was put on the agenda upon his request. He was not comfortable with the four different funding proposals which were put before him so he met with the City's Finance Department and was able to come up with an alternate funding source, that being interest earned off of the 1994 and 1995 Special Project Funds. He contacted Samantha Orduno and asked that this item be added to the agenda. He also spoke with the Auditors who informed him that it was acceptable to use the funds toward this project. Ms. Hankner stated at the last council work session the council members agreed to a 0% levy increase. This was what she wanted all along. However, her position on the issue was that if the pedestrian bridge were to be approved, something would need to be taken out of the 1996 budget to allow it in order to assure the 0% levy increase. Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated he is very dismayed at the attitude that anything other than the proposed tax levy for next year is not the money of the citizens of the city. There is no excuse for going outside of the proper process in making expenditures. There has never been a question about the value of a pedestrian bridge, however he feels the public was cut out of the entire process. Mayor Linke stated he did not know what Mr. McCarty was referring to when he said the public was cut out of the process. The public has been involved in the decision since approximately April when the city first started talking about it. There were many residents present at council meetings since then in support of the bridge. The only time they opposed it was when the city was considering putting it on the taxes. Mr. McCarty asked if people really expect that pedestrians directly across the highway from their destination will walk a considerable distance just to use the bridge. He wondered where the plan or specific study that was required to Page 5 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council determine whether or not this bridge was a good, usable amenity to the entire community. The residents did not have an opportunity to ask the questions they planned to on November 29th. He does not believe that the November 29th discussion date was only in the event that a tax levy would be required. Furthermore, it his understanding that per Code 203.8, Subdivision 5, a 4/5 vote of approval is required to spend any money out of the Special Projects fund which the city does not have at this time as it was passed on a 3/1 vote. Mayor Linke explained that he asked the Auditors about the proposed expenditure of the funds for the pedestrian bridge and they assured him that the interest portion could be used for this project. Mr. McCarty suggested that the City Attorney be contacted about this issue, as he believes the funds were committed without a 4/5 vote. Pam Starr, 7778 Woodlawn Drive stated she would like to applaud the City Council for finally making a decision that is looking at the safety of the children in Mounds View. She does not know how anyone can be so short-sighted that they can say Mounds View cannot afford the bridge when there are children who need to cross the highway. Jim Schmitt, 5446 Erickson Road, stated there has been public input on this issue since April. At the meetings he has attended there has been a greater number of residents in favor of the bridge than opposed to it. Furthermore, at the Public Hearing on the issue of whether the city would use tax increment financing , he heard four out of the five council members state two different times that they were in favor of the bridge, they just had a disagreement on taxes. He stated the city must find funding for a project such as this. He has three children and is active in youth activities in the community. They use the community as a whole and he feels access is a problem in the community. The bridge will greatly improve this problem. He is happy that the decision was made. Ms. Hankner stated the council decided they would not increase the taxes for purposes of funding the pedestrian bridge, but that they would still go ahead with the grant and directed staff to go into the budget and try to determine where funds could come from. At that time it was still in the context of the 1996 budget. For public purposes, the council let them know that it would be discussed as a part of the 1996 budget on November 29th when they were to hold the Public Hearing. It was still in the 1996 budget. • Page 6 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council The residents did not have any notice that the council was going to take action on this issue on November 13th. She feels the action was out of line with the process. Mayor Linke stated at the budget work session there was not any discussion about keeping it in the 1996 budget and removing another item to allow for it. Ms. Hankner stated this has been her position from the beginning. No one mentioned at the work session that it would be taken out of the 1995 budget or that it would be discussed at the November 13th meeting. Jim Schmitt, 5446 Erickson Road, stated he does not feel the council acted inappropriately. They found resources that were not known beforehand to fund the project. Henry Ruggles, 2629 Lake Court Drive, stated he understood that the pedestrian .bridge was a "dead issue". This was a comment he heard made by Mayor Linke after the last meeting on the bridge. Mayor Linke stated he was only referring to the tax increase to help fund the project. If he were unable to find another funding source, it would have been a dead issue because he was not going to support putting it on the 1996 budget. Mr. Ruggles stated theoretically, if the project funding had not been approved, the residents may have been able to have a 3% decrease in their taxes for 1996. MOTION/SECOND: Hankner/Blanchard to direct staff to get a get an opinion from the City Attorney on the 4/5 approval requirement for the use of the interest of the Special Project Funds. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Ms. Hankner stated she would like this information available at the November 29th hearing if possible. An unidentified resident asked if there are cost overruns on the bridge, will the State increase their share or will the city be responsible for the additional costs. Mayor Linke stated the Engineers are provided with a maximum amount and it must not exceed that amount. • Page 7 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council Ms. Trude stated if necessary, other items will need to be cut in order to bring it back into the approved project cost. Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road, stated he also would like to obtain the City Attorney's opinion on whether or-not the interest earnings come under the requirements of the Ordinance. He would also like the City Attorney inform the council on the legal requirements of the Long Term Financial Plan and how it intertwines with the budget through the Charter Requirements, and therefore be subject to the Truth in Taxation hearing laws. The bridge was originally set up in the 1997 budget in the Long Term Financial Plans, and therefore the council will also need to-amend the ATLP. He would like to obtain this information by the November 29th hearing. He stated he feels everyone at the meeting wants to unite Mounds View and make it safe for their children and citizens but they want to be part of the process. PUBLIC HEARINGS: a. To Consider Request for Conditional Use Permit -North Star Land Services. Mayor Linke opened the Public Hearing at 7:45 p.m. Mr. Paul Harrington, Interim City Administrator, explained that North Star Land Services, who represent U S West, has made an application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the construction of an enclosure to house fiber fed telecommunication services. This request is far property located at 2280 Highway 10. The actual location of the structure would be a 20 X 20 easement, fronting on Wooddale Drive. The enclosure would be approximately 6 X 9 feet. Mr. Harrington noted that in the Spring of 1995, a similar request was granted on the Multi-Tech property at 2205 Wooddale for the business park north. This one would service the buildings an the south side of the business park. 5220 McConnell, stated he purchased his property about two years ago and he was not aware of this. Mr. Harrington stated the building will be located on a 20 X 20 foot easement. U S West has approached the property owner themselves and requested the easement for the building which has been drawn up and wilt be signed based upon the city council's approval. Mayor Linke closed the Public Hearing at 7:55 p.m. Page 8 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchard to Approve Resolution No. 4849, Approving a Conditional Use Permit for a Public Utility Structure, U S West Communications, 2280 Highway 10. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Mayor Linke opened the Public Hearing at 7:55 p.m. to Consider a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for Richard and Julie Oliverius, 8426 Groveland Road. Paul Harrington explained that Richard and Julie Oliverius made an application for a Conditional Use Permit to establish a Residential Dog Kennel on their property at 8426 Groveland Road. Residential dog or cat kennels are allowed in an R-1, single family zone district. They are only allowed to have up to four dogs or cats (over six months of age -puppies under 6 months are not included in that total). The applicant was required to obtain approach property owners within 500 feet of his property with a petition outlining his proposal, which he has done. Approximately 85% of those approached signed the petition saying they were not in opposition to the request (50% is required). Mr. Harrington noted that there are conditions on the resolution, in specific, that after a period of one year, the Conditional Use Permit is subject to a review. Ms. Blanchard stated she recalled that the Council turned down a request for a kennel in that neighborhood in the Spring of 1995. Mayor Linke stated this was a different property, and it was turned down as the applicant was unable to obtain signatures of residents in the area as required. Ms. Trude asked if Mr. Oliverius intends to breed dogs. Mr. Oliverius stated he does not plan to have any more litters. He wanted to keep a couple of the pups to get started in training. Ms. Trude stated another concern voiced by a resident was whether or not someone would be home during the day to notify if there were a problem with dogs barking. Mr. Oliverius stated there is not someone home during the day. However, the dogs are usually kept in the garage during the day. They do have voice mail in the event there is a complaint. Page 9 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council Ms. Trude stated some of the residents who spoke with her in regard to this request stated they were comfortable knowing there was aone-year review period for the Conditional Use Permit. Mayor Linke closed the Public Hearing at 8:04 p. m. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Linke to Approve Resolution No. 4850, Approving a Conditional Use Permit for Richard and Julie Oliverius. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Mayor Linke opened the Public Hearing at 8:04 p.m. to Consider a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for Brian Daniels, 7280 Silver Lake Road. Mr. Harrington explained that Mr. Daniels has made an application for a Conditional Use Permit for an oversized garage on his property at 7280 Silver Lake Road. The garage which has already been constructed, totals 1,248 square feet. The Mounds View Municipal Code allows garages up to 1,264 square feet with the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. When an accessory . building exceeds 1,000 square feet, no other buildings are allowed on the property other than the principal structure. Mr. Daniels does have a small 100 square foot building on his property which he has agreed to remove. (This requirement is stated on Resolution No. 4851, and requires a $1,000 escrow to insure that it is removed from the property). Mayor Linke closed the Public Hearing at 8:06 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Quick to Approve Resolution 4851, Approving a Conditional Use Permit for Brian Daniels, 7280 Silver Lake Road. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Mayor Linke opened the Public Hearing at 8:06 p.m., to Consider a Request for a Rezoning of A Portion of the Property Located at 2801/2809 Bronson Drive. Mr. Harrington explained that Larry Beach has made an application for the rezoning of a portion of the property located at 2801/2809 Bronson Drive. He would like to rezone the properties from R-1, Single Family Residential to R-2, Single and Two-Family Residential. The request will allow the construction of twin homes on the property. The current properties front Bronson Drive and have single family homes on them. The single family homes would remain that Page 10 • November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council are fronting along Bronson Drive, but the back 225 feet of those lots would be included in the rezoning. The twin homes would front on Silver Lake Road. Mr. Beach has already constructed two twin home sets just north of this property along Silver Lake Road. This request is subject to criteria spelled out in the Municipal Code regarding rezoning. Ms. Blanchard stated she received a telephone call. in regard to this request, asking if the property would be rental property. Mr. Harrington stated the properties in the building that Mr. Beach has already constructed have sold for a minimum of $165,000 per unit which likely would not support a rental type set up. Mary , 2816 Bronson Drive presented a signed petition from residents in the neighborhood who are opposed to the division of the lots and the construction of twin homes. They wish to have the property remain zoned single family residential. By changing the zoning, it changes the whole atmosphere of the area. She stated when she looks at the property she sees the potential for more homes to be put there in the future. Ms. Trude stated the appearance of the buildings is much like single family homes. She stated the Planning Commission has been pleased with the enhancements that Mr. Beach has brought to the city along silver lake road and over by Messiah Lutheran Church. She also understands that there is a real desire for this type of housing in the area. Mr. Harrington explained that the city's code requires that twin homes that are constructed each have a minimum frontage of 50 feet. Mr. Beach is proposing two buildings which would require a minimum of 200 feet. He is proposing to rezone 225 feet. Code restrictions would limit the, number of buildings that could be constructed on the property. . Ms. stated another concern of the neighborhood is the increase in traffic. Mr. Harrington explained that traffic will enter and exit the buildings on Silver Lake Road, so traffic should not have much of an impact on the area. Mr. Beach stated the twin homes he proposes to build will appeal mostly to empty nesters and retirees. He feels this is the best type of land use for the property. Page 11 . November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council Dan Hill, 2808 Bronson Drive, stated his concern is in the degradation of the lot sizes. The existing properties are deep lots which have been particularly attractive to residents. He was concerned what would happen to the values of those properties where the lots are basically cut in half. Mayor Linke explained that in comparison to other lots in Mounds View, they still will be larger than most. Mr. Hill also asked what assurance the residents will have that the properties do not become rental units in the future. Mayor Linke explained that the city does not have control over that. Another unidentified resident stated he has been told that the property directly across from Mr. Hill has been sold. He wondered if Mr. Beach intends to put in a cul-de-sac there. Mayor Linke explained that any proposals such as that would need to be approved by the city. Mr. Beach stated he has ut a down a ment on the ro ert but it has not been p p Y P P Y closed on. He intends to fix the property up and then sell it. He does not intend to keep it as rental property. Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 8:20 p.m. Mayor Linke explained that this public hearing was to introduce the ordinance. The city must then wait at least 14 days before they can ask for the adoption of the ordinance. There is then a 30 day waiting period before that action becomes law. Ms. Hankner noted that the real issue is that this proposal fits within the city's Comprehensive Plan. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Quick to Approve the Introduction of Ordinance No. 569, Rezoning a Portion of Lots `10 and 11, Spring Lake Park Knolls Addition. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried Mayor Linke opened the Public Hearing at 8:23 p. m. to Consider a Request for Wetland Alteration Permit for Sherri Ruf, Representing Louis Downing. Page 12 November 27, 1995 ' Mounds View City Council Mr. Harrington stated in the fall of 1994, Sherri Ruf, representing her father Louis Downing requested a Wetland Alteration Permit which would allow construction of a single family home on the property which is located at the intersection of Longview and Wooddale Drive. The applicant was required at that time to have a Wetland Delineation performed on the property in order to determine the exact limits of wetland that was on the property. Ms. Ruf has completed this and presented two different proposals for developing the property as single family housing. Mr. Harrington provided diagrams of the two different proposals, noting that Rocky Keehn has reviewed both and feels that proposal number 2 would involve the least amount of disturbance to the wetland area. The delineation has also been submitted to the Rice Creek Watershed District who approved it and of the plan to construct the home. This proposal involves a mitigation of the wetland on the property. Mr. Keehn provided a brief overview of what his findings were. He noted that a natural strip would be required between the lawn and the wetland. Mr. Allen Sheldon, 5143 Red Oak Drive, stated he owns property near the site and has some concern as to flooding problems he may experience as his . property is not much higher. He also was concerned that the changes could create a mosquito habitat which could cause a nuisance for him (he referred to a section of the MN Statutes which he felt was applicable to this case). Mayor Linke stated he did not know what the entire statute reads, but did not feel it would pertained to wetlands, but rather referred to property with standing water which would encourage a mosquito habitat. David , 5166 Longview Drive stated his only question is whether or not the city should allow constant building in buffer zones that they have created and what the actual purpose of a buffer zone is. Mr. Harrington explained that the city has .had situations where the buffer zones have greatly influenced proposals by the developer not being able to provide the necessary improvements to the wetlands that are required. Mayor Linke closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m. Ms. Trude noted that she had a resident talk to her about Woodcrest Park. She stated she talked with Mr. Harrington about this and Woodcrest Park still continues to be the low spot, however this plan will not add any runoff to the park as it will provide its own drainage. Page 13 November 27, 1995 Mounds Vietiv City Council Mr. Quick asked if the Resolution for this proposal specifies Proposal #2. Mr. Harrington stated as a part of the Development Agreement, Proposal #2 will be attached as an exhibit. MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Blanchard to approve Resolution No. 4852, Approving a Wetland Alteration Permit for Sherri Ruf, Representing Louis Downing (Proposal #2). VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay (Hankner) Motion Carried COUNCIL BUSINESS: A. Consideration of Resolution 4856, Approving the Adoption of the Certified Copy of Corporate Resolution, Authorizing Facsimile Signatures. Mayor Linke explained that Samantha Orduno and Don Brager are no longer with the City of Mounds View, so this Resolution would authorize Paul Harrington and Mary~Tatarek to .replace Ms. Orduno and Mr. Brager's signatures • on city documents. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Blanchard to approve Resolution 4856, Approving the Adoption of the Certified Copy of Corporate Resolution, Authorizing Facsimile Signatures. VOTE: 5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried B. Discussion on 610/118 possibly becoming a toll road: Mayor Linke stated he noticed that when MNDOT came through with proposals for toll roads, -all of 610/118 is being proposed as a tol! road which he feels defeats the entire purpose of having it. If people have Highway 10 to travel rather than use the toll road, they will likely do it. He would like to request that council direct staff to prepare a resolution for the December 11 meeting in opposition to making 610/118 a toll road because it will adversely affect the City of Mounds View. Ms. Hankner stated if the council is to consider a resolution such as this, she would like to obtain some additional information on the issue. Mr. Harrington stated he will attempt to get information together for the December 4th. council work session. Page 14 November 27, 1.995 Mounds View City Council REPORTS: Report of Council members: ui k: No report. Blanchard: No report. ankn r: Ms. Hankner asked if a meeting has been scheduled for the Airport Task Force as was discussed at the last City Council meeting. Mr. Harrington explained that a meeting has been set for Tuesday, November 28, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Everyone is invited to .attend and offer comment on the Noise Abatement Plan for the Anoka County Airport. Ms. Hankner also asked if Request for Proposals have gone out for Lega! Services. • Ma or Linke stated at the last council works ssion it was recommended b Ms. y e y Orduno to hold off on this issue until a new City Administrator has been hired and this was agreed upon by the council members. Ms. Hankner stated she did not understand why this process should be delayed and understood that the current contract is due to expire December 31, 1995. Mr. Harrington stated he will check on this, but it is their understanding that the current rate is locked in and the contract is on-going. Trude: No Report 2. Report of Ma,.yor Linke: No Report. 3. Report of Administrator: No Report. Mayor Linke stated the next Council Work Session is scheduled for December 4, 1995 at 6:00 p. m. The next Council Meeting is December 11, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Linke adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Page 15 November 27, 1995 Mounds View City Council Respectfully submitted, Tamara D. Saefke Recording Secretary u •