Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 11221988C= TY (DE' S T_ ANTHONY C= TY C O UN C= L M llN UT E S NOVEMB E R 22, a-988 1 The meeting was called to order at 7:32 P.M. with the Pledge of 2 Allegiance led by Mayor Sundland. 3 ROLL CALL 4 Present for roll call: Marks, Ranallo, Sundland, Enrooth, Makowske. 5 Also present: David Childs, City Manager 6 Sue VanderHeyden, Assistant to the City Manager 7 William Soth, City Attorney 8 NOVEMBER 8 1988 COUNCIL MINUTES 9 Motion by Makowske, seconded by Sundland to approve with the following changes: 11 Page 1, line 17: Substitute "or" for "of". 12 Page 3, line 12: Substitute "Chain" for "changed". 13 Page 6, line 39: Substitute "work with" for "replace". 14 Page 6, line 44: Substitute "St. Anthony" for "City". 15 Page 6, line 46: Substitute "he" for "the". 16 Motion carried unanimously. 17 There was general concurrence that copies of the Salvation Army's Master 18 Plan for Silver Lake Camp should be sent as a courtesy to the City of 19 New Brighton. 20 LICENSES/PERMITS/PETITIONS 21 Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Marks to grant the following licenses as 22 listed in the November 22, 1988 Council agenda packet: 23 Heatina• 24 Riccar Heating, Andover, MN 25 Thrane Inc., Minneapolis, MN 1 Contractors• . Delory Company, Maplewood, MN 3 Nordquist Sign Company, Minneapolis, MN 4 Cragg Sign Inc., Golden Valley, MN 5 Motor Vehicle Starting License: 6 J & S Automotive (Apache Mobile), 4000 Silver Lake Road 7 Amusement Devices: - 8 Bono's Malt Shop and Arcade (4 machines) 9 Apache Plaza 10 11 CLAIMS Motion carried unanimously. 12 Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Marks to approve payment of all City and 13 Liquor Operations accounts payable as listed for October 31, 1988 in the 14 November 22nd Council agenda packet as well as all the November 8th City 15 accounts payable distributed by the City Manager during that same 16 meeting. 17 Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Marks, seconded by Makowske to approve payment of $639.00 19 annual membership dues in the National League of Cities. 20 Motion carried unanimously. 21 Motion by Marks, seconded by Ranallo to approve payment of $7,200.00 to 22 Pacesetter Heating Supply, Inc. for materials necessary for the new 23 HVAC system for the City fire station. 24 Motion carried unanimously. 25 Motion by Enrooth, seconded by Marks to approve payment of the corrected 26 figure of $158.57 to Rieke Carroll Muller Associates, Inc. for 27 engineering services during October, 1988 on the City's temporary water 28 treatment facility. 29 Motion carried unanimously. 30 Motion by Makowske, seconded by Enrooth to approve payment of $26,082.04 31 to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission for November sewer 32 service. 33 `A Motion carried unanimously. 1 Payment of the September 22nd statement from Braun Engineering had been tabled at the previous Council meeting for further information and Councilmember Enrooth indicated he still didn't fully understand the 4 company's November 17th explanation to Mr. Hamer. Mr. Childs indicated 5 he perceived a portion of the attachments to that letter had been left 6 out of the agenda packet and explained that the Council would be paying 7 for the testing costs for the concrete, curbing, bituminous on St. 8 Anthony Boulevard and for the concrete work done on Kenzie Terrace in 9 conjunction with the traffic signal installation. He also indicated 10 that these costs had been reversed on the September billing. 11 Council Action 12 Motion by Marks, seconded by Makowske to approve payment of $4,852.60 13 to Braun Engineering Testing with $4,141.35 to be paid for the St. 14 Anthony Boulevard project and $711.25 for the Kenzie Terrace Project 15 contingent upon a corrected billing being submitted to staff. 16 Motion carried unanimously. 17 The requested public appearance relating to the St. Anthony float/queen 18 candidate was deferred to later in the agenda. 19 REPORTS 20 NOVEMBER 15, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - RICK WERENICZ The Planning Commission representative indicated action on the R. L. e2 Johnson Investment Co. request for a sign variance had been tabled for 23 a month to allow the applicants to work with staff on a more acceptable 24 sign proposal. 25 Video Update Expansion Approval Contingent Upon No Flashing Lights and 26 Improvements Meeting Codes 27 Commissioner Werenicz reported the Planning Commission had accepted 28 Craig Belisle's claim that he had not realized he needed a building 29 permit to expand his Video Update business into the space next to his 30 store. The Commission had perceived there might have been failure in 31 communication between staff and the store owner which had resulted in 32 the store's retention of flashing lights in the windows, which are in 33 violation of the City Sign Ordinance. The Commission was therefore 34 recommending the conditional use permit Video Update received in 1984 35 be expanded to cover the new store space on the condition that the non - 36 conforming lights be removed altogether. 37 Councilmember Enrooth said he was concerned that a businessman who had 38 been operating a store in the City for the number of years Mr. Belisle 39 had would not have become more knowledgeable about the rules and 40 regulations under which he was licensed to operate and he questioned 41 whether the extension should be granted until some of the questions on 1 which the Commission had not been able to get answers during the hearing were cleared up. 3 Mr. Childs indicated the City Ordinance would not prevent the store from 4 having the lights in the window, but only said they should not be 5 flashing. (He said they are not at this time.) The City Manager 6 reported the Public Works Director was waiting to hear the Council's 7 direction that evening before proceeding with the inspection and 8 issuance of a permit for the expansion. Councilmember Makowske said she 9 personally had no problem with Mr. Belisle keeping the lights in the 10 window as long as they aren't flashing and are turned off when the store 11 is closed. Councilmember Enrooth indicated he was still concerned that 12 this was just another situation where a store owner takes actions with 13 complete disregard for the City's codes and ordinances and then pleads 14 ignorance and is allowed to continue to be in non-compliance. 15 Mr. Belisle stated that there had been communication problems with the 16 City regarding the lights, reiterating that he had received no response 17 to the letter his franchise lawyer had sent to the City in 1984 18 insisting that the lights should be considered "historical symbols". 19 He said he had thought the matter was a dead issue when he had gotten 20 no response from the City. 21 Mr. Childs recalled that the Planning Commission had considered the 22 lawyer's letter and refused to accept the historical symbol concept it 23 proposed. The City Manager said although he had no copy of a letter 94 informing Mr. Belisle of that ruling, he thought he had called the store owner. Since that had all happened in 1984, he couldn't be z6 absolutely certain what action had been taken so long ago. 27 When Councilmember Ranallo expressed some concerns about the extent of 28 electrical work the store owner and the other Video Update employees had 29 done in the new space, Mr. Belisle said all they had basically done was 30 to lift the electrical junction boxes up into the suspended ceiling 31 without disconnecting the conduit at all. Mayor Sundland indicated that 32 was one of the reasons he perceived it would be necessary to make the 33 permit extension contingent upon the Building Inspector's assurance that 34 the remodeling met all the necessary codes and ordinances. 35 Condition #4 in the original permit was not considered relative to the 36 permit because the stop sign it called for had been installed in the 37 meantime. Councilmember Marks said he shared Councilmember Enrooth's 38 sense of frustration with the unauthorized expansion and continuation 39 of .non -conforming signage in this store. He recalled experiencing the 40 same type of frustration during the years he served on the Planning 41 Commission when applicants would come in at the last minute to request 42 an "'immediate' variance for a project which had to be constructed 43 before the frost set in, etc." The Councilmember said then as now he 44 considered these to be cases where the owners exhibited very poor 45 planning but wasn't certain what other action the City could take with 46 this expansion already completed. Councilmember Enrooth indicated he ^7 would be satisfied to have the property given a thorough inspection by 0 1 Mr. Hamer who would make sure all the electrical, plumbing, etc. were up to code. 3 Council Action 4 Motion by Makowske, seconded by Ranallo to grant an amendment to the 5 conditional use permit originally issued on February 28, 1984 to Video 6 Update, 2510 Kenzie Terrace N.E., to include the expansion of the video 7 store's retail space into the adjoining space recently vacated by Popco 8 Cleaners. As recommended by the Planning Commission, the Council 9 imposes the following conditions on the amendment: 10 1. There would be no viewing of tapes in the store, except for bona fide 11 demonstrations of tapes and no viewing would be visible from outside 12 the store. 13 2. The proprietors must comply with all state laws relating to obscenity 14 and to any ordinance of the City of St. Anthony thereafter relating 15 to obscenity. 16 3. Conviction of the owner or any of the employees of the owner for 17 violation of obscenity laws in the operation of the store would be 18 grounds for revocation of this permit by the City Council. 19 4. There shall be no flashing lights in the front window of the store. '20 5. Approval of the amendment is contingent upon an inspection of the premises by the Building Inspector to ascertain that they meet all z2 City ordinances and codes. 23 Motion carried unanimously. 24 Setback Variance for Hance Garage Granted With No Objections From 25 Neighbor 26 Commissioner Werenicz indicated that after hearing very extensive 27 testimony from the applicant, Edward J. Hance, including his response 28 to drainage concerns from the next door neighbor, the Planning 29 Commission had concluded hardships had been demonstrated which justified 30 the City's granting the requested variance for the proposed garage at 31 2813 Silver Lane. The Commissioner explained that the Commissioners had 32 agreed that the configuration of the lot as well as stringent lake 33 setback requirements imposed by the Rice Creek Watershed District 34 appeared to fulfill the three requirements for granting such a variance. 35 He said the Planning Commission also perceived the 13-1/2 foot setback 36 Mr. Hance was proposing was an improvement over the 10 foot setback from 37 the property line which had been provided by the garage which had 38 previously stood on that property. 39 Andrew Szurek, 2809 Silver Lane, whose home is located just east of the 40 Hance property, told the Councilmembers his appearance at the Planning ^t Commission hearing had only been to get more information on the project 9 1 which was going in next to him. He indicated staff had reassured him drainage would be provided in a manner which would cause no problems for this property. The resident added that he and Mr. Hance had come to a 4 satisfactory understanding on all issues which had previously caused 5 him some concern. 6 Councilmember Marks indicated that under his understanding of what 7 constituted a hardship for which a variance could be granted, this 8 request came the closest to meeting the definition of a hardship than 9 he had perceived in many variance applications which the Council had 10 previously granted. 11 Council Action 12 Motion by Marks, seconded by Enrooth to grant the variance requested 13 by Edward Hance which would allow the construction of the proposed 14 garage at 2813 Silver Lane within a minimum of 13 feet from the front 15 property line as shown in the architect's October 11, 1988 site and 16 elevation drawings presented at both the Planning Commission's November 17 15, 1988 hearing and the Council's November 22, 1988 consideration of 18 the variance. In granting the 17 foot variance to the City Ordinance 19 requirement for 30 foot front yard setbacks, the Council finds, as did 20 the Planning Commission, that the applicant had satisfactorily addressed 21 the three statutory requirements for granting a variance and a hardship 22 had been created for the applicant by the strict regulations of the Rice 23 Creek Watershed District regarding setbacks from Silver Lake. Motion carried unanimously.. 25 Council Approves Amending P.U.D. for Kenzington Apartments of St. 26 Anthony 27 Commission Recommendation 28 In addition to copies of the Commission minutes pertaining to the above, 29 the Council agenda packet had included the same documentation as had 30 been provided Commission members for the November 15th hearing. 31 Commissioner Werenicz reported the Commissioners had no problem with 32 recommending the Council waive the preliminary plat and approve the 33 final plat for the 9.34 acre parcel to include the addition of the 34 triangular parcel of the parking lot west of the Town and Country Store, 35 which will be acquired by the City to make the site changes perceived 36 necessary by the developers. However, he said, as reported extensively 37 in the minutes, several changes in the plans which had been approved in 38 August, resulted in lengthy discussions with staff and the developer's 39 representative. 40 The Commission representative indicated the Commissioners had approved 41 resiting the buildings away from the perimeter of the property; 42 provision of a "villa -type entrance concept for the two largest ^3 buildings; and the pond and pool in the center court area. The major 7 1 concerns had been about adding another driveway on Kenzie terrace and the provision of less brick on two of the buildings than had been promised in the Redevelopment Agreement, he indicated. 4 Commissioner Werenicz told the Council the Commissioners had been 5 unanimous in their opposition to another curb cut off Kenzie Terrace, 6 perceiving it would defeat the purpose of the traffic signal the City 7 had just installed to serve the project's main entrance as well as the 8 Kenzington across the street. He said the developers had indicated 9 they would have a traffic study done to see if the Commission concerns 10 were warranted and had even suggested they might be able to turn 11 Building A around to maintain the necessary flow of traffic within the 12 project. 13 The other "bone of contention" had been the Commissioner's perception 14 that the developers were not providing as much brick as promised 15 originally, and which Commissioner Werenicz conceded might have been a 16 tradeoff for a better building design, but still didn't seem to meet 17 the terms of the Redevelopment Agreement. 18 Developers Defense of Changes 19 Paul Brewer, Gene Nelson, and Greg Bronk of Lang/Nelson Associates and 20 a representative of Leonard Lampert Architects were present to answer 21 questions from the Council. 22 Mr. Brewer confirmed the changes in the site plans which would: z3 *move the 50 unit, 3 story senior Building A away from the street and 24 farther from the "huge mass of the Kenzington" across Kenzie Terrace; 25 *at the same time, *ie that building and the other 75 unit senior 26 Building B and the 76 unit general occupancy Building C closer 27 together; 28 *provide drainage for the site into a pond adjacent to the pool in the 29 center which would provide a focal point for the buildings; 30 *relocate the parking lot exits farther away from the main entrance 31 where there would be less incline and more room for stacking. 32 Mr. Brewer indicated the developers had perceived a real marketing 33 advantage to providing the villa, clustered entrance type design for 34 Buildings B and C because those are the types of amenities prospective 35 renters seem to be looking for in multi -family housing. He pointed 36 out, however, that whenever more angles and roofing are added to a 37 building, it has to cost more money than it would to just construct a 38 three story building which looks more like a dormitory. That cost 39 factor, and the architectural design which was decided on, called for 40 brick exteriors on the first two floor exteriors of Buildings B and C, 41 wood siding on the highest center portion. W 1 The President of the LaNel Financial Group indicated the developers were ' proposing another entry into the site which would provide ingress and s egress and to only Building C through the existing curb cut which had 4 previously serviced the upholstery shop. He said he perceived the 5 existing median in front of this building would force drivers leaving 6 the site to go north to either access Highway 88 or St. Anthony 7 Boulevard. Mr. Brewer said he would anticipate Building C's residents 8 to develop traffic patterns which would bring them up Stinson rather 9 than trying to make a U turn in front of Kentucky Fried Chicken to reach 10 the building from the south. The developer indicated it would not be 11 advisable from a marketing standpoint to direct traffic around the 12 senior building which would have to be done if the second driveway 13 isn't allowed. He also pointed out that under such a plan those 14 seniors would be cut off from the amenities of the rest of the site and 15 there would be less green space provided in an area where green space 16 is already scarce. 17 Councilmember Ranallo reiterated that the City had promised the 18 Minneapolis neighbors that access to the project would not be provided 19 from Lowry Avenue. Mr. Childs added that traffic would have to be 20 routed over private property for an access to the east to be provided. 21 When Councilmember Ranallo wondered whether, since the City would be 22 eliminating a number of Kenzie Terrace curb cuts for this project, a cut 23 in the median itself couldn't be made to access Building C. Mr. Brewer 24 indicted he thought that might work because it was very likely only the 2.5 residents of that building would be using that driveway because the project's prospective rental activities would be carried on in Building L7 B. 28 Commissioner Werenicz indicated he had expected the developers would 29 have already done the traffic flow studies which they had promised the 30 Commissioners they would do to justify the additional curb cut. Mr. 31 Brewer told him that, given the constraints on time to get the project 32 going which wouldn't allow them to redesign the whole site, the 33 developers had instead worked on trying to solve the problem internally 34 without architectural changes. They were unable to do this however, and 35 were now hoping the Council would say they liked the new site plan and 36 then would be willing to let Lang/Nelson to work with staff on a 37 satisfactory method of directing traffic in and out of the site based 38 on the study which had recently been done for the City for the same area 39 by Short -Elliott -Hendrickson, Inc. The City Manager indicated the 40 results of their efforts could still be made at the Council's December 41 13th meeting. 42 Councilmember Makowske Adamant About Having All Brick Buildings 43 The Councilmember said she really appreciated the new villa -type concept 44 in the building design as well as the ponding and moving the project 45 away from Kenzie Terrace but perceived not having brick on the third 46 floor exteriors of Buildings B and C would be "really downgrading the A7 project". Mr. Brewer told her not providing as much brick had been a matter of 2 economics once the developers got into changing roof lines and adding 3 separate entrances for the ends of the buildings. However, he added 4 that he was certain that once she saw the buildings up she would change 5 her mind because putting the wood on the top floor of those two large 6 buildings tended to cut the scale down and added more texture and 7 interest to the buildings which would now relate better to the 8 adjoining residential areas. The developer said a need was perceived 9 for a visual transition between the large brick building across Kenzie 10 Terrace, the three story brick Building A and then a reduction of the 11 "mass" effect with the two story villa -type units with clustered 12 entrances. 13 Between 25-30 residents had begun to gather in the Chambers for the 14 recycling forum which followed and the illustrated drawings of the 15 project were shown to them. One person expressed the concern that it 16 might be masonite which the developers were planning to use in the 17 areas which weren't. bricked. Mr.Brewer assured her the wood portions 18 of the buildings would all be in stained cedar wood and would present 19 a project in which the whole City could take pride. 20 Council Actions 21 Motion by Marks, seconded by Enrooth to waive the preliminary plat and 22 approve the final plat which would combine all legal descriptions for 23 property contained in Phase 3 of the Kenzie Terrace Redevelopment Project into a single parcel described as Lot 1, Block 1, St. Anthony z5 LaNel Addition. Subject property is generally described as the St. 26 Antony Village Shopping Center property and several small adjacent 27 property parcels in the general vicinity of the 2600 block of Kenzie 28 Terrace. Approval is contingent upon the City Attorney reviewing the 29 replacement of a portion of the sewer easement running through the 30 center of said property which is necessary for siting one of the 31 proposed buildings. 32 Motion carried unanimous) 33 Motion by Marks, seconded by Ranallo to amend the Detail Plan and 34 Development Concept Plan for Phase 3 of the Kenzie Terrace 35 Redevelopment Plan (dated November 4, 1988) from the one approved in 36 August, 1988, to allow a second curb cut for a driveway on Kenzie 37 Terrace with a corresponding cut in the median and/or a new entrance 38 into Building C's underground garage on the other side of the building 39 subject to an update of the traffic study done a year ago to indicate 40 what effect a median cut might have on the traffic flow in that area. 41 Motion carried unanimously. 42 Councilmember Makowske Ouestions Wood/Brick Mix ProRgsed by Developers F] 1 The Councilmember persisted in her argument that having an all brick 1 building gave a "much finer and more substantial, permanent appearance, s besides being much easier to keep up." When she said she perceived all 4 the developers who had been approached to construct the project 5 understood perfectly well at the start that the City wanted all brick 6 buildings, she was reminded that the buildings which had originally been 7 approved for the project had not been all brick. Gene Nelson, 8 President of Lang/Nelson Companies, reiterated that the developers had 9 already undertaken improvements in the project which were twice as 10 expensive as those for the project the City had originally planned. 11 He said the buildings had been downsized to give them a more 12 interesting appearance and any further expenses would not be 13 economically feasible. He reiterated that he "didn't want these 14 buildings to look like the six or seven story Kenzington, but rather to 15 fit better into the residential environment around the project with 16 their own character which would increase their rentability." It was his 17 opinion that the amount of wood they proposed on the two larger 18 buildings with the roof drops and separated entrances would add to 19 rather than detract from the character of the buildings and would 20 achieve more of the look the Council wanted than two more three story 21 brick buildings with roof tops straight across. He disagreed with 22 Councilmember Nakowske's assumption that upkeep would be related to the 23 exterior materials, but said that it rather would be related to the 24 style and the physical structure of the property and the people who are 25 operating it. He pointed out that the majority of the project 26 exterior would still be brick and reiterated that he thought the wood 27 sections would add "stature, texture, and character" to the whole project. 29 The Councilmember agreed that she "loved the villa look", but found it 30 difficult to give up the brick. Councilmember Ranallo told her he 31 wanted the brick also but preferred having this project to a "box style" 32 which the City would get with all brick. 33 Mr. Childs reported that the change in the Redevelopment Agreement to 34 accept less brick would have to be handled by the Housing and 35 Redevelopment Authority. 36 Council Action 37 Motion by Enrooth, seconded by Marks to amend the Development Concept 38 Plan and Detail Plan under the P.U.D. section of the City Zoning 39 Ordinance as proposed by Lang/Nelson Associates dated November 4, 1988 40 for Phase 3 of the Kenzie Terrace Redevelopment Project. 41 Voting on the motion: 42 Aye: Enrooth, Sundland, Marks, Ranallo. 43 Nay: Makowske. 44 Iwo] Motion carried. COUNCIL REPORTS 2 Resident's Concerns and Questions About Organized Collection Heard by 3 Council and Recycling Task Force Members During Open Forum 4 At 8:40 P.M., Mayor Sundland opened the public forum on Resolution 88- 5 040, a resolution of the Council's intent to organize solid waste 6 collection in St. Anthony, which the Council had adopted after a public 7 hearing, September 27, 1988. The Mayor told the 25-30 residents who 8 were present that: 9 *the State, under the Waste Management Act, had mandated statewide 10 recycling by 1990 and gave the City the choice of looking into 11 recycling and either establishing its own program or letting Hennepin 12 and/or Ramsey Counties who are responsible for getting recycling 13 established, to do it for them; 14 *Hennepin County had indicated it would pay 80% of the City's start 15 up overhead costs if the City took the initiative of establishing its 16 own program; 17 *the Council perceived it would be beneficial for St. Anthony to 18 operate its own program and appointed a Recycling Task Force 19 comprised of St. Anthony citizens as well as Councilmember Enrooth as 20 the Council's liaison, and Public Works Director, Larry Hamer as 11 technical advisor; 22 he was personally offering no comments on his own perceptions related 23 to recycling, good, bad, or indifferent. 24 Councilmember Enrooth, as well as Task Force members Lauren 25 McClanahan, 3507 Roosevelt Street N.E.; Keith Pearson, 3501 Belden 26 Drive; Paul Norr, 2832 Coolidge Street N.E., responded to resident 27 concerns about the program recommended by the Task Force in a mem- 28 orandum dated July 18th. The Councilmember indicated the Task Force, 29 comprised of Village residents, had met about 5 times, during which they had: 30 *looked at proposals submitted by garbage haulers in response to 31 invitations to submit proposals which were sent to all rubbish 32 hauling companies who are licensed to collect rubbish in St. Anthony 33 now, as well as recycling companies; 34 *had considerable conversation with other residents to whom the Task 35 Force members had access; 36 on September 27th recommended to the Council that St. Anthony should 37 proceed with one hauler, waste Management, to make both garbage and 38 recyclable collections from all the single family residences in the 39 City, perceiving that company had met all the criteria the Task 40 Force had set. 11 1 The Councilmember had told the members of the public who were present it had been during the Council's October 11th meeting that it had been determined that in spite of a public hearing on that action as well as 4 many newspaper and City Newsletter articles on the subject, it appeared 5 there were still some residents who were not certain just what the City 6 intended to do, and another public forum to give them the opportunity 7 to provide input to the process might be beneficial during the 90 day 8 waiting period before a contract can be written with any garbage hauler. 9 Residents' Testimon 10 Bob Ring, 3211 Edgemere Avenue: 11 *indicated that because he and his wife spend between six and eight 12 months of the year out of town, principally at their cabin in 13 Wisconsin, they had discontinued using any St. Anthony garbage hauler 14 and carried any garbage they generated here back up to Wisconsin 15 where they generated a lot more; 16 *said he "believed in recycling" and recycled all the waste materials 17 he could himself but was concerned that he might have to pay $15 18 or $20 a month for service he didn't utilize under the new program. 19 20 Councilmember Enrooth indicated the Task Force had discussed the 21 possibility that some residents might not have any garbage at all, but 22 questioned whether that was possible and were concerned some of these might represent situations where illegal means of disposing of garbage z4 like burning or disposal on the site, which they knew was already 25 happening in St. Anthony, posed health hazards for the community. 26 Mr. Pearson identified himself as a Task Force member, saying he was 27 present that night "to support getting recycling started in St. Anthony 28 as soon as possible." He indicated he had attended five or six 29 meetings and was available to provide insight into the Task Force 30 recommendations. 31 Donald R. Evertz, 2817 St. Anthony Boulevard, said he was present in 32 response to the information carried in the Recycling Update article in 33 the Fall Newsletter, which also extended an invitation to attend the 34 open forum. 35 Mr. Evertz said he: 36 *like all the other residents, had missed all the previous Council 37 meetings and the Public Hearing on the same issue; 38 *was almost in the same boat as Mr. Ring because he used another 39 garbage hauler and was concerned he would be experiencing a duplicate 40 expense for recycling; 12 1 *was just "Republican" enough to oppose giving a contract to only one hauler who he perceived with no competition, could raise his rates J next year; 4 *expected there would be "no free lunch" as far as getting back money 5 from recycling went; and 6 *preferred to deal with his own hauler. 7 Jim Wiehoff, 3508 Coolidge Street, identified himself as "representing 8 himself and other community members who vote" reported that when the 9 predecessor to Waste Management did the garbage hauling, the service had 10 been "excellent", but as soon as Waste Management took over, the 11 service had become very erratic, resulting in garbage being left out on 12 the streets for days at a time. He said he and most of his neighbors 13 had switched to Woodlake because of that poor service. Mr. Wiehoff said 14 he preferred the "free enterprise system" which enabled them to do that 15 and was concerned that if that were taken away now, the residents would 16 suffer from "big corporation" actions which he deemed inappropriate for 17 such a small community. The resident wanted the City to retain some 18 measure of competition by at least contracting with two services the 19 first year and making a decision as to who would serve the City after 20 that on the service those two provided during the testing period. Mr. 21 Wiehoff then suggested that selection could even be made by a vote of 22 the community at the next election. The resident added that he had 23 perceived the Waste Management driver in his area was always in such a 24 hurry that small children in his neighborhood might be endangered. a5 Alvena Law, a resident of Mirror Lake at 4001 Foss Road, said she had 26 to leave the meeting early but was concerned that her complex could 27 not handle the large Waste Management trucks and wanted the residents 28 to be able to retain Larry Saba, the hauler they had now. Councilmember 29 Smooth indicated there were certain conditions related to haulers which 30 Hennepin County had mandated and those conditions had to be met by the 31 Mirror Lake hauler in terms of recycling all the materials which 32 required by the County. He reiterated that if the City didn't meet 33 those requirements, then the County could select a service which would 34 meet them. The Councilmember told Mrs. Law he didn't believe her hauler 35 had submitted a bid to provide all the City's hauling and that might 36 have been because Mr. Saba couldn't meet the County requirements. Mr. 37 Childs told him the hauler wasn't even licensed to haul in St. Anthony. 38 He also pointed out that the City was only addressing the concept of 39 servicing single family residents at this time and would have to look 40 at multi -family service later on. 41 Mike Gondek, 2901 St. Anthony Boulevard, was told the final selection 42 of a hauler wouldn't be made until after the first of the year although 43 the Task Force had recommended the City begin negotiating a contract 44 with Waste Management during the required 90 day waiting period. 45 Mr. Gondek said he was also opposed to giving any single vendor a A6 monopoly on the service because he had seen many instances where that 13 1 was done and the "service went down while the prices went up." He added ? that he didn't think older residents should have to haul their garbage s down to the curb and wondered whether residents were going to be given 4 a choice of days to have their collections made because the resident 5 said he is out of town all week and he has to put his garbage out on 6 Monday and can't bring the empties back in until he returns on Friday. 7 When Mr. Gondek identified himself as the letter write who had sent 8 letters to all the Councilmembers in which he had drawn a comparison 9 between the City's proposal and Soviet Russia, Mayor Sundland told him 10 it might have been because of that statement that he had received no 11 replies to his letter. Mr. Gondek then suggested that if the City was 12 going to be the only one to deal with the garbage hauler the Council 13 selected, it might be a good idea to include all the Councilmembers' 14 phone numbers on the bills so residents could make any complaints they 15 had about the service directly to them. Councilmember Ranallo told 16 the resident that based on the number of calls he had gotten in response 17 to the Bulletin article about recycling, which had highlighted his own 18 disappointment not to see residents at the public hearing on the same 19 issue, he was certain the Councilmembers would be the first to hear 20 from the residents who are unhappy with the new system. 21 The Councilmember indicated that the City had always had the option of 22 just letting hauler who met the County's criteria handle the recycling, 23 but having had no resident concerns expressed to them, had accepted the 24 Task Force's arguments for having only one vendor. Councilmember Enrooth told the residents there's nothing to prevent any c6 hauler who meets the County's criteria from charging any rate they 27 chose. He added that "just so you don't get surprised, you should be 28 aware that when the County's incinerator goes into operation, your 29 charges, regardless of who your hauler is, will automatically have to 30 go up by roughly $6.00 to $8.00 a month." He pointed to the Hennepin 31 County newsletter which had been sent to all county residents as the 32 source of that information. The Councilmember said he hoped the 33 residents realized that raises like that couldn't be blamed on the 34 haulers who only have to respond to the conditions imposed on them from 35 government agencies. 36 In response to a question from Councilmember Marks related to the number 37 of haulers who had responded to the City's invitation to submit a 38 proposal, Councilmember Enrooth reiterated that only three companies, 39 Waste Management, Super Cycle, Inc., and Knutson had responded at first 40 and a fourth, Reuters, had contacted the City at the last minute in the 41 process. Even though Task Force members inspected Reuter's facilities, 42 the fact that their process concept had not been accepted by Hennepin 43 County resulted in that proposal not being seriously considered. The 44 Councilmember said several of the vendors, including BFI, the parent 45 company of Woodlake, had at first declined to submit proposals. Only 46 one, Waste Management, appeared to meet all the Task Force's 47 requirements and already picked up about 820 of the City's garbage. One A8 didn't pick up in St. Anthony at all, but did service other 14 1 communities, and the third only handled recyclable materials and no '. other forms of garbage. 3 Jim Cobourn, 3429 Coolidge Street, indicated he agreed with Mr. 4 Wiehoff's complaints about the quality of service since Waste 5 Management took over for Walters and said that was why he had also 6 switched haulers. The resident said his family has always been in 7 favor of recycling and tried to recycle all the materials they could. 8 However, he said he also wanted the option of selecting his own hauler 9 and changing any time he didn't like either the service or the charges. 10 LeRoy Genaw, 3404 Roosevelt Street, indicated a conflict with another 11 commitment had kept him from attending the public hearing on recycling. 12 He read aloud from the list of questions and concerns about the proposed 13 program, which he said bothered him, including whether: 14 *it might not be rather "labor intensive" for Waste Management rather 15 than the residents to separate the recyclables after they're picked 16 up and whether that wasn't just something the ad hoc committee had 17 added to obtain the public's acceptance and participation; 18 *Waste Management customers would continue to deal directly with the 19 garbage hauler or whether the City would no w be handling the billing 20 and charging the residents for that service; 21 the recycling service would cause the $34.50 per quarter the residents ?2 now pay to go up or down. .&3 Councilmember Enrooth reiterated that the City expected all hauling 24 charges to go up by $6.00 to $8.00 a month as soon as the County 25 incinerator is put into operation, which the Councilmember said he 26 understood was now scheduled for July, 1989. 27 Stephen Johnson, 3204 Croft Drive, said he hoped the residents who 28 don't generate a lot of recyclable materials would have the option of 29 storing 60 gallon (rather than 90 gallon) containers in their garages, 30 many of which are already overcrowded. Councilmember Enrooth told him 31 that was just the sort of input the City was looking for during the 90 32 day evaluation period. He said 60 gallon containers had been one of 33 the options the study group had left open for further consideration. 34 Mr. McClanahan, who had served as the Task Force Chair, told the 35 residents to ad hoc committee's intent had been to find a recycling 36 program for St. Anthony which would be the most effective; give the City 37 some return; and would at the same time meet the criteria established 38 by the County. He said they knew they couldn't please every resident, 39 but perceived the City's contract with Waste Management, the only hauler 40 who appeared to meet that criteria, could be renegotiated to correct any 41 problems the next time around. 42 When Mr. Wiehoff asked the Task Force Chair whether they had researched ^3 the number of customers who had remained with Waste Management after 15 1 they took over Walters to determine the type of service the new service '. gave, the City Manager said a survey taken about a year ago had s indicated that Waste Management was the trash hauler for about 1,600 of 4 the City's 2,000 single family residences; Twin City Sanitation served 5 about 200 residents, and Woodlake (BFI) about 150. Krupenny refused to 6 reveal the number of customers they had but staff figured they 7 couldn't be much higher than 50 to 75 homes because that was all that 8 was left. Mr. Childs indicated the Mirror Lake hauler had not been 9 included in those figures because they didn't fit into the single 10 family category and their hauler wasn't licensed to pick up in the 11 City. 12 Mr. Everts reported he had also switched haulers when Walters had been 13 taken over and now had Twin City Sanitation who charged him $4.00 less 14 per quarter than he would have to pay Waste Management, which he said 15 proved to him that "without competition, I would never be able to save 16 that 1148.00 a year." 17 Mr. Norr indicated he had also served on the Task Force but hadn't been 18 able to give as much time to it as he would have liked. He responded 19 to Mr. Everts' remarks by saying the competition would still be there 20 with the City negotiating the contract to get the best deal for the 21 residents. The Task Force member said he hoped there would be a 22 single staff member who would be responsible for the garbage billing. 23 Mr. Norr indicated he had talked to the City of St. Louis Park and found 24 that under a program for that whole city they had seen a 35% rate i decrease with the city -negotiated contract to include recyclables. He z6 said any customer with 2,000 homes like St. Anthony should be able to 27 negotiate a lower charge than individual homeowners could. Mr. Everts 28 said he was still not convinced that the City "wouldn't still be 29 stifling free enterprise" by going with only one hauler. 30 Mr. Norr suggested the fees Waste Management charges should be adjusted 31 in accordance with the volume of waste each household generates. He 32 said perhaps they should charge more for everything above 45 gallons 33 they pick up at every house just the same as is now done in Robbinsdale 34 and many communities in Washington State. The Task Force member 35 indicated he liked the idea of making every family responsible for the 36 amount of waste they generated, pointing to himself as an example of 37 a single person household who is very conservative and generates at 38 least four times less garbage than his neighbor with a much larger 39 family. Mr. Norr added that the Citizens League had concluded that if 40 pricing were based on the volume generated, recycling would be much 41 more successful. 42 Councilmember Enrooth thanked him for his suggestions which he said he 43 recalled Mr. Norr had also sent to Mr. Hamer at the end of the study 44 process. 45 Bernie Webber, 3212 - 33rd Avenue N.E,. indicated he was familiar with 46 the system of recycling used in St. Louis Park where his mother lives. 16 1 He indicated that city uses color coded plastic baskets into which the ' residents sort out their bottles, cans, and newspapers and he thought s were also specifically identified as to address. He reported that the 4 financial incentive to generate less recyclable waste was also built 5 into that system because the residents were given a $6.60 quarterly 6 credit on their billing for recycling at least three times per quarter, 7 which he said amounts to over $26.00 a year. The resident said his 8 greatest concern was with all the proceeds going only to the City's 9 Beautification Fund and nothing returned to the residents who are paying 10 for the pick up who he knew from his own garbage bills had experienced 11 a five fold raise in what they paid since he moved to St. Anthony. 12 Mr. Webber said he thought giving a financial incentive to the residents 13 would serve as a greater encouragement for them to recycle and not 14 ignore the system. The resident then indicated he thought Woodlake's 15 willingness to pickup next to his garage was aesthetically better for 16 the community as a whole because under the present system of irregular 17 pick up by other vendors, there are always empty cans and covers laying 18 out in the street on windy days. He said he didn't think he should have 19 to pay more for that same service under the new program. 20 When Mr. Webber reported talking to Woodlake and finding out that the 21 company was quite disturbed that they hadn't been solicited to provide 22 input or submit a bid to do the City's hauling, Councilmember Enrooth 23 told him that company had been solicited through their parent company, 24 BFI, at the only address the City had on their license, and they had 25 at first declined to participate; had second thoughts about it later, 26 and had brought in the documentation that they had been notified with them when they came into the City Offices the previous day to request z8 they be considered as the City's recycler. The Councilmember also 29 indicated financial incentives to the recycling customers had also been 30 one of the major Task Force recommendations to the Council. 31 Rose Murphy, 2601 - 36th Avenue N.E. said she didn't see any reason for 32 having to pay three months in advance for garbage services when other 33 services like heat and electricity only billed her after she had gotten 34 the service. The resident said she was especially irritated to have 35 Waste Management bill in advance for services she had never received 36 because she had been out of town on vacation. She said Christens, the 37 company which had preceded Waste Management, had always given her a 38 discount for any periods when she didn't require their services. 39 Mayor Sundland reported he had gotten the same type of complaint about 40 garbage cans flying around the street and having to haul their garbage 41 cans down to the street from other City residents, Chet and Ruth Nelson, 42 as had been expressed by Mr. Webber. The resident's response to that 43 was that although Woodlake wouldn't pick up tree branches or materials 44 of that sort from his garage, they did provide that service for garbage 45 cans which were more apt to be flying around the street if left at the 46 curb. Mr. Webber added that his mother only paid $105.66 to have her 47 garbage and recyclables hauled in St. Louis Park, while he was paying 48 Woodlake $144.00 a year to have all his garbage hauled now and 1 understood Waste Management was currently charging only $138.00 a year 1 for curbside service. 3 Mr. Ring said he had the same objections as Mrs. Murphy to having to pay 4 for garbage service he didn't need during the six or seven months his 5 wife and he are living in Wisconsin. The resident stated, however, 6 that he had no complaints whatsoever about the service Waste Management 7 provided during the periods he required such service. 8 Ruth and George Thompson, 3015 - 39th Avenue N.E., were present for the 9 discussion of a City float which was to be held later that evening. 10 Mrs. Thompson said she perceived having everyone on the same street 11 putting out their garbage on the same day and not having garbage cans 12 sitting out all week long all over the City might outweigh the 13 competition factor. 14 Advantages of Integrating Garbage and Recyclables Collections Touted 15 by Ramsey County Waste Manager 16 Colleen Halpine, who indicated she worked for Ramsey County as a Solid 17 Waste Supervisor, said she had studied solid waste issues for years and 18 had brought a fact sheet with her that evening for distribution. Ms. 19 Halpine said Ramsey County has three communities who have recycling 20 contracts with haulers now, which although they were handled 21 differently, probably provided more service for less money to those 22 cities than St. Anthony was paying for its current service. She said 23 her department thought it was better to have only one hauler for any ! particular area and gave the different methods under which that service a5 could be handled. She said all the issues the residents were raising 26 that evening could be negotiated and "put down in black and white" in 27 whatever type of contract is written with the hauler or haulers who 28 handle the integrated collection system. The discount for periods when 29 the service is not used could be written into the contract and well 30 advertised by the City. The Ramsey County representative told the 31 residents that as shown on the Fact Sheet, both they and the City would 32 have a lot more control than they currently have over the service under 33 an integrated system which provides garbage collection, curbside 34 recycling and separate yard waste collection for which the customer 35 pays with only one billing than under the open hauling system, which 36 charges more for the same services. 37 Ms. Halpine pointed out that in White Bear Township, where haulers 38 provide garbage hauling, recycling services, and yard waste collection 39 under an integrated collection system, residents only pay $9.25 per 40 month as compared to $13.00 a month residents have to pay in any city 41 which doesn't have a contract with a hauler or a group of haulers to 42 provide all services. The County official warned the residents that 43 after 1990, haulers who now provide only garbage and/or recycling 44 services will probably have to make a second run to pick up brush, 45 grass clippings, and leaves during the growing season, which might 46 require separate haulers for yard waste collection. 18 1 Ms. Halpine agreed that households which generate less waste should be rewarded for that economically which would result in people who recycle s and compost a good percentage of their waste having to pay a much lower 4 rate. The Solid Waste Supervisor also suggested senior citizens rates 5 and discounts for people who live out of town for six months could be 6 negotiated in a city contract where all parties know exactly what their 7 responsibilities will be. She added that the state and the 8 Metropolitan Council were both emphasizing the importance of having the 9 citizens doing most of the separation and taking responsibility for 10 their own solid waste management, which would be much cheaper in the 11 long run than having all the wastes go to the County incinerators. She 12 also reiterated the information from the Fact Sheet which reported a 13 city could be exempted in 1989 for $18.00 a year in Ramsey County taxes 14 for each single family residence if they financed their own recycling 15 system as North Oaks, White Bear Lake and White Bear Township are 16 already doing. 17 Mayor Sundland explained that St. Anthony had to deal with Ramsey 18 County's as well as Hennepin County's requirements, since there are 19 portions of the City in both jurisdictions. He then thanked Ms. Halpine 20 for providing insight into Ramsey County's regulations. Before closing 21 the forum, the Mayor told Mr. Thompson policing the system to see each 22 residence paid for its own service was one of the issues which would 23 have to be looked at when the contract with the City vendor is 24 developed. 25 The More St. Anthony Recycles. the Less the Residents Will Have to Pay t6 Jim Gencauski and Bob Christen of Waste Management were present for 27 the discussions and Mr. Gencauski told the residents: 28 *the more materials his company can divert from the landfills or the 29 incinerator, the less they would have to charge the St. Anthony 30 customers; 31 *if Waste Management collects both garbage and recyclables for the 32 City, they would be able to keep track of how much is diverted and 33 adjust the rates in accordance after the first year, just as they do 34 in Robbinsdale and Columbia Heights; 35 *the company diverted 85 tons of waste in Robbinsdale which saved 36 them $30.00 a ton in landfill charges and it is estimated those 37 savings could amount to as much as $75.00 a ton for materials 38 diverted from the incinerator; 39 *his firm already grants discounts for periods when customers were 40 out of town and didn't use their service. 41 Residents' Input to be Included in Contract Negotiations For Recycling 42 Hauler M11 1 Before recessing the meeting at 9:25 P.M., Mayor Sundland thanked the ? residents for their input to the planning process for recycling. He 3 said all the valuable suggestions they had made would be included in the 4 selection of a vendor which would not be made until at least the 5 Council's first meeting in 1989. 6 The meeting was reconvened at 9:43 P.M. 7 Council Accents Plans for Theme and Support for City Float 8 Barb Olsonoski, Marketing Director for the Apache Plaza Merchants 9 Association and Councilmember Ranallo reported suggestions they had 10 gotten from attending a float seminar at the Thunderbird Motel the 11 previous weekend which they were recommending be utilized for a 12 community float, which were: 13 *to retain the Dennis Johnson firm to construct, store and deliver 14 the float to each parade site for a maximum of $4,500.00 construction 15 costs and $350 to $400 to be paid to have the float delivered to each 16 site and operated by someone from that company (there would be no 17 charge for the first parade); 18 *to pay the insurance costs with a rider to the City's LMC umbrella 19 policy; 20 *have the City officials ride with the queen the first few years to 21 establish St. Anthony's identity and give the Councilmembers public exposure; 23 *to have the float in neighborhood events like the New Brighton 24 Stockyard Days; Fridley 49ers Day, the Northeaster and Central Avenue 25 parades, as well as the Minneapolis Aquatennial Day parade (only 26 marching bands and larger floats are allowed to participate in the 27 night parade); 28 *establish two committees, one to seek sponsors for the float from the 29 local merchants and service organizations, and the other to take care 30 of scheduling the float and queen appearances; 31 *request Larry Jones of the Bulletin to report the organization of the 32 float committees and to tell the residents about the float and 33 proposed activities. 34 Councilmember Ranallo indicated he thought that now that there was no 35 longer a marching band which was identified as only from St. Anthony, 36 the community needed something like this float to keep up its image. 37 He reported he had learned that neither the City nor Apache would have 38 the expertise to build the float for the City and the price quoted by 39 the Johnson firm was much lower than he and Ms. Olsonoski had thought 40 would have to be paid for the float. 20 1 Ms. Olsonoski indicated Bill Sauer, a former St. Anthony Councilmember, ? and George and Ruth Thompson who were present for the discussion, would 3 be working on the project with her. She said she hoped to be able to 4 take advantage of Bill and Duffy Sauer's experience with queen contests 5 for this project. 6 Mayor Sundland commented that he perceived there was a lot of support 7 and enthusiasm on the Council to help with the float and getting it 8 financed. 9 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10 Resolution Vacating Portions of Wilson and Coolidge Street and Assuring 11 Relocation of Sanitary Sewer Lines Adopted by Council for LaNel 12 Atartment Project 13 Mr. Soth had suggested in his November 21st letter that the existing 14 easement be vacated with the vacation made effective only upon the 15 developers granting a new easement acceptable to the City and the 16 relocating the sewer line to the new easement. A copy of the proposed 17 resolution had been provided with his letter. 18 Council Action 19 Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Marks to adopt Resolution 88-046 with the 20 new provision for vacating the existing utility easement recommended by 21 the City Attorney. �2 RESOLUTION 88-046 23 A RESOLUTION VACATING A PART OF TWO STREETS 24 AND A PORTION OF EASEMENT 25 Motion carried unanimously. 26 DEPARTMENT AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 27 The following were accepted and ordered filed as informational: 28 *Hance and LeVahn report of cases the law firm had prosecuted for the 29 City in Hennepin County District Court up to and including November 30 2, 1988; 31 *October, 1988 Fire Department Report; 32 *September, 1988 Financial Summary. 33 CONTINUATION OF COUNCIL REPORTS 34 First Meeting of St. Anthony Historical Committee Held 21 1 Councilmember for the Makowske re J his Committee's first meeting there Picture meetin had been about ten nt Committee wastaken with the g in addition toyor persons 5 to begin gO1pg to hold group' The Council ember ndland, Who had g with and said one meetings every fourth indicate 6 be held in the Kenzi of the first Monday d her 6 be invited to ng 0 Communit meetings Y of the month 8 hi to attend Y Room gS would be scheduled to Y• In January and share their where older 9 members of the .1 the recollections residents could l0 historical Minnesota Histo lcal ttee would be about St. 11 societies Societ about Anthony directions on °n how Y and/or fro g advice from purpose, which woulde up their M other small town 12 projects Y set enable the Committee to zations and 13 The Councilmember fulfill its 14 on the Committee then thanked 15 number he had d Larry Jones for the it Of calls written in the Bulletinfab 16 longer had she had received h indicati fabulous,, article 16 well doubts that St. Anthonyfter ng that as the front of the Y residents arti the d from the Bulgy read appeare she 18 The Committee back sections as 19 liaison then 20 sheopy of the committee told the newswriter 21 had given for the photo as well she would be having been article as correction of Sending him 22 committee, made by the which identified the information Girl Scouts rather the oral history as 23 Counc' than the Bicentennial ilmember perc 24 �5 of Councilme now Good the St. 26 a concert the Makowske reported she 27 both thought past Sunday at and her husband 28 She said ght was every bit the St• Anthony High School which 30 make more any they had ever heard they have in the orchestraresidents publicity should be before. 31 thanked more aware of what a valuable given to d her Councilme these for her kind words, tuber Marks who pia s asset they 32 Councilmember Enrooth Y In the orchestra 33 Count Groundwater Co Re orts mmittee in Earl Mornin 34 Minnetonka Meetin of the The Councilmember reportedHerne in 35 snowy morn attendance 36 g• He he above was really approaching the perceived this theabove meeting recent °n a 37 Overview of water problems from a different group which 38 by Concil Anoka Herne in Corrin.,, angle. 39 Althou - "'MmAztees Pro cess Give gh he had been On his y home 41 percei40 the dvedsthe Committee had w last from Washington 42 idea about other Councilme gton, D.C, the met, the Councilmember 43 media what the Committee mesas s should have night had carried doin been able to Said he a4 Avenues corridors reportin g from several get a good plus g consideration of announce the connection the Universitments the between the two. Y/Central 22 1988 Government Service Training Sessions Underwa 2 Councilmember Marks reported the first planning conference had been held 3 last week in Brooklyn Center, another was scheduled for December 1st 4 in North Mankato. Conferences in Alexandria and at the Earle Brown 5 Center at the University would follow later in December. 6 Councilmember Learns Firsthand That It Takes Skill to Drive a Snowplow 7 The Councilmember concluded his report by saying he had realized the 8 above when he had participated in the Public Works Department's Ride - 9 Along Program. He said Dick Kristyniak had extended an offer for him 10 to ride along when he was plowing after the last snowfall and found out 11 that his first impressions that the plows were "big, lumbering, giant - 12 like machines which would be incredibly difficult to manage on heavily 13 trafficked streets", had been very accurate. He said he's now looking 14 forward to riding along when there's a really big snowfall to plow. 15 CITY MANAGER REPORTS 16 The Council indicated they perceived no more need this year than last 17 year for the services of the Dispute Resolution Center, whose brochure 18 was in their agenda packet. 19 Manager Gives Update on Negotiations With U S Army Regarding Water 20 Contamination By Twin City Army Ammunition Plant z1 Mr. Childs indicated he perceived progress was being made and he hoped 22 to be able to make an announcement on the completion of those meetings 23 sometime within the next few weeks. He said he was happy to report 24 that the process on the permanent carbon filtration plant was moving 25 close to schedule and hadn't been delayed too much recently in spite of 26 all the difficulties along the way. 27 AGENDA ADDENDUM 28 Mr. Childs indicated that because he had been on vacation, some of the 29 items which should have been listed had not been included on the agenda. 30 Among these was the announcement that the lettering would be put on 31 the entrance sign late the next afternoon which he thought the 32 Councilmembers might want to know about in advance. 33 Final Payment to be Made to the School District for Parkview 34 Mr. Soth advised that he had received the deed for the building, 35 effective November 1, 1988, which meant the City could make the final 36 payment of $18,000.00 for the parking lot. 37 Council Action 23 PUBLIC HEARING 2 Assessments Hearing on St Anthony Boulevard Reconstruction Continued 3 to December 13th 4 At 10:25 P.M. the Mayor opened the hearing on the proposed assessments 5 against Gross Golf Course and Sunset Memorial Cemetery property for the 6 above improvement and requested a motion to continue the hearing until 7 the Council's next meeting. 8 Council Action 9 Motion by Enrooth, seconded by Marks to continue the public hearing on 10 the assessments for improvements on the St. Anthony Boulevard 11 Reconstruction Project until the Council's December 13, 1988 meeting. 12 13 NEW BUSINESS Motion carried unanimously. 14 Resolution Affirming St. Anthony Affirmative Action Program Adopted 15 Ms. VanderHeyden told the Councilmembers she knew there would need to 16 be some minor changes made in the draft of the above document in their 17 agenda packet but assured them that any typos, etc. would be corrected 18 before the resolution was formally filed. �9 Council Action 20 Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Marks to adopt Resolution 88-045. 21 RESOLUTION 88-045 22 A RESOLUTION OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN EMPLOYMENT 23 Motion carried unanimously. 24 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 25 Second Reading Approved for Charitable Gambling Ordinance 26 The City Attorney had highlighted the exceptions in the above document 27 as suggested by Councilmember Makowske at the last Council meeting. 28 Council Action 29 Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Enrooth to approve the second reading of 30 Ordinance 1988-011 which permits the sale of pull tabs for charitable 31 purposes in the two City on -sale liquor establishments. z2 ORDINANCE 1988-011 25 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO LAWFUL GAMBLING IN MUNICIPAL 2 LIQUOR DISPENSARIES FOR THE ON -SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR; 3 AMENDING SECTION 445:10 OF THE 1973 CODE OF ORDINANCES 4 Voting on the motion: 5 Aye: Ranallo, Enrooth, Sundland, Makowske. 6 Nay: Marks. 7 Motion carried. 9 Motion by Sundland, seconded by Ranallo to adjourn the meeting at 10:25 10 P.M. for the St. Anthony Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting 11 which followed immediately. 12 13 Respectfully submitted, 14 Helen Crowe, Secretary �6 Mayor J 17 ATTEST: �6Y YUCJ��k�v 18 City Clerk 19 :cjk W. Motion carried unanimously.