HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL PACKET 08201996 Meeting Sheet
IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII
101462
BOX:TO
Folder: PL PACKETS 1996
Document: PL PACKET 08201996
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
August 20, 1996
7:00 PM
Council Chambers
I. CALL TO ORDER.
II. ROLL CALL.
III. APPROVAL OF AUGUST 20,,1996 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA.
IV. APPROVAL OF JULY 16, 1996 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES.
V. DESIGNATE PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO AUGUST 27,
1996 COUNCIL MEETING.
VI. PUBLIC HEARING.
A. Subdivision of Property and Replatting Request -- Arnie Gregory, The
Arbors, Old Highway 8 (96-12).
B. Variance Request for Non-Conforming R-1 Lot -- Bruce Nedegaard,
Fordham Drive (96-13).
C. Sideyard Setback Variance Request for Attached 2-Car Garage --
William Hedberg, 2509 - 30th Avenue N.E. (96-11).
D. St. Anthony Health Care Center, Mike Miller (96-10).
1 .) Conditional Use Permit.
2.) Parking Setback Variance.
3.) Lot Coverage Variance.
4.) Rear Yard Setback Variance.
5.) Side Yard Setback Variance.
VII. CONCEPT REVIEW.
A. Proposed Building Site and Plans for SAV II -- OPUS, Apache Plaza.
B. Proposed Building Site and Plans for Lot 3, Apache Plaza -- OPUS.
VIII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE.
A. Review Submitted RFPs and select short list to be interviewed on
Sept. 17, 1996.
IX. COMMENTS.
A. Commissioners.
B. Staff.
1 . September Public Hearings.
2. TIF Review -- September/October.
X. ADJOURNMENT.
I CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
3 JULY 16, 1996
4 I. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
5 The meeting was called to order and the Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice Chair Thompson at
6 7:01 p.m.
7
8 II. ROLL CALL.
9 Commissioners present: Commissioners Delmonico, Gondorchin, Horst, Makowske, and
10 Thompson. Commissioner Franzese arrived at 7:03.
11 Commissioners absent: Chair Bergstrom
12 Also present: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant; Cathy Sorensen,
13 Recording Secretary.
14 III. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 16, 1996, PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA.
15 Public Hearing Item B,C. William and Susan Lutterman,Rear Yard Setback Variance Request,was
16 requested to be moved to the first item heard. Moved by Gondorchin, seconded by Makowske, to
17 approve the Planning Commission Agenda for July 16, 1996, as amended.
18
19 Motion carried unanimously.
20
21 IV. APPROVAL OF JUNE 18, 1996, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES.
22 Page 1, Line 28, add "due to conflict of interest."
23 Page 8, Line 18, add "recalled proposal was done in the 1980s."
24 Motion by Gondorchin,seconded by Franzese,to approve the Planning Commission minutes of June
25 18, 1996, as corrected.
26
27 Motion carried unanimously.
28 V. DESIGNATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE.
29 Commissioner Horst was appointed as the Planning Commission representative for the Tuesday,July
30 23, 1996, City Council meeting.
3.1 VI. PUBLIC HEARING.
32 A. Rear Yard Setback Variance Request- C. William and Susan Lutterman. 3433 Croft Drive
33 96-09
34 Vice Chair Thompson opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m. Ms. Kim Moore-Sykes,Management
35 Assistant, read the report to the Commission:
36
37 BACKGROUND:
38 Mr. and Mrs. Lutterman, owners of the property at 3433 Croft Drive, have submitted a rear yard
39 setback variance request of 18 feet so that they may be able to build a porch and deck on the back
40 side of their house. The house is situated on a corner lot and also sits in the rear yard setback by two
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 2
1 inches. Because they purchased the house as built, they are unable to make any improvements to
2 this side of the house without a variance.
3 The construction of this proposed addition will not impact the lot coverage requirement. Once the
4 project is complete,the total footprint of the residence will occupy 2,861 square feet, or 24.7% of
5 the total property square footage of 11,586.6. The City Ordinance restricts lot coverage to 35%.
6 As indicated in their letter submitted with the application, a porch and deck addition to their home
7 would be consistent with other homes in the surrounding neighborhood. They have contacted their
8 immediate neighbors that would be impacted most by this addition and received favorable responses
9 from them. Staff have not received any information from anyone in the neighborhood who objects
10 to the proposed addition.
11 RECOMMENDATION:
12 Staff recommends approval of the variance request of 18 feet,provided that the applicants complete
13 the porch and deck construction within 12 months as stipulated in the City Zoning Ordinance. The
14 applicants have demonstrated hardships that make it impossible to improve their property in any way
15 that would make it usable. They purchased property that has a residential structure already sitting
16 in the rear yard setback thereby precluding the construction of a porch and deck without a variance.
17 It is also a corner lot which is required by the Zoning Ordinance to have at least 11,000 square feet.
18 Because of the unusual configuration of the house,they are unable to make improvements on much
19 of their property.
20 Mr..Lutterman reviewed the proposed porch and deck addition for the Planning Commission. He
21 noted the addition would be 24 feet, 10 inches from the property line, and would begin with the deck
22 portion, with the porch being added the first part of next year.
23 Commissioner Makowske inquired if there was any other way the property could be improved. Mr.
24 Lutterman stated there is no potential to enjoy any outdoor activity at the home now due to insects.
25 He stated other homes in the area have similar porches added, and noted if his home was on a
26 standard lot with adequate side yard he would not need a variance request to allow an addition.
27 Commissioner Makowske stated the home is on an unusually shaped lot, which could be viewed as
28 a hardship,one of the criteria for a variance. Mr.Lutterman agreed,and stated the home was already
29 built when he purchased the property and cannot change the placement of the home. He also stated
30 he has spoken with the neighbors and have received their support. He noted the wall that will face
31 the neighbor most impacted by the addition will have no window openings,and the distance between
32 the two dwellings will be 10 feet, four inches.
33 Vice Chair Thompson closed the public hearing at 7:12 p.m.
34 Motion by Gondorchin, seconded by Franzese,to approve the rear yard setback variance request for
35 C. William and Susan Lutterman as presented,based on meeting the three criteria for variances and
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 3
1 that a certificate of survey has been completed. Commissioner Franzese amended the motion to add
2 that the neighbors are supportive of the variance.
3 Motion carried unanimously.
4 Vice Chair Thompson invited Mr. and Mrs. Lutterman to attend the July 23, 1996, Council meeting
5 where a final decision will be made.
6
7 B. Rezoning Request- Howard and Dorene Krueger, 3631 Harding Street N.E. (96-08)
8 Vice Chair Thompson opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. Ms. Kim Moore-Sykes,Management
9 Assistant, read the report to the Commission:
10 BACKGROUND:
11 Howard and Dorene Krueger have submitted an application for the rezoning of their property at 3631
12 Harding Street. As they indicated in their application letter, they are requesting this zoning change
13 to accommodate their desire to rent out a portion of their home to unrelated adults. Mr. and Mrs.
14 Krueger explained that their children no longer live at home, leaving them with a space that is
15 available to rent. This request is also being put forward because there is R-2 zoning adjacent to their
16 property on the north side.
17 Currently,the house has only one kitchen, which they share with their tenants. If they are granted
18 their rezoning request,they would install an additional kitchen facility in the lower level,where their
19 tenants reside. Staff have also spoken to Mr. Krueger about the need to comply with other building
20 and fire code issues.
21 In 1984, Mr. and Mrs. Krueger initially petitioned for a rezoning of this property. At the time they
22 were planning to build their home with an apartment on the lower level to accommodate a parent
23 living with them. The Krueger's indicated that this apartment could be later turned into an income
24 producing situation for them. Because of much neighborhood opposition,the Planning Commission
25 recommended denial of the application and the Krueger's.withdrew their application.
26 ANALYSIS:
27 The property is in an R-1 zoning district and approving the petitioner's request would result in "spot
28 zoning",which is counter to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Land Use
29 Plan.
30
31 The purpose of the R-1 Zoning District is to create, promote, and maintain areas which have low
32 traffic volumes and because of historical development patterns are best suited for single-family
33 detached residences (1615.01 Purpose). Single family homes are the only residential structures in
34 the R-1 Zoning District of the City.
35 The current Comprehensive Plan shows the area as an R-1 Zoning District. In order to change the
36 Comprehensive Plan, the City is required to file a proposed amendment with the Metropolitan
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 4
1 Council. This process to amend the City's Plan can take up to six weeks to complete. This is the
2 minimum amount of time required by the Metropolitan staff when evaluating a proposal for minor
3 amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.
4 Several neighbors have also called City Hall to voice their concern for the neighborhood should this
5 rezoning request be allowed. They feel there will be an increase in traffic causing the area to lose
6 its quiet,residential nature. An R-2 Zoning District currently exists to the north of the neighborhood
7 and the feelings expressed indicate that multi-family dwellings should remain in those areas
8 specifically zoned for them.
9 RECOMMENDATION:
10 Staff recommends denial of the application.
11 Mr. Krueger stated he is currently renting two rooms to tenants and there would be no increase in
12 traffic or any other aspect other than the addition of a kitchen in the lower level.
13 Alice Beerman, 3632 Coolidge Street N.E., stated that in 1984 Mr. Krueger stated the rooms would
14 not be used for rental units, only as a mother-in-law type apartment. She stated Mr. Krueger does
15 not keep his landscaping in good order, and recommends denial of the application.
16 Mr.John-Goering,3615 Harding Street N.E.,stated the zoning will live beyond the property and will
17 affect the City after Mr. Krueger is no longer living there. He stated Mr. Krueger has recently had
18 the property offered for sale,and believes the rezoning request is to help in the sale of the property.
19 Mr. Rick Werenicz, 3606 Harding Street N.E., stated Mr. Krueger requested rezoning in 1984 for
20 financial reasons. He stated the neighborhood helped defeat that request for spot rezoning,but have
21 still seen an increase in traffic in the neighborhood due to people renting at the Kruegers'.property.
22 He stated Mr. Krueger did not live at the address for a period of time, and rented rooms to four to
23 six adults with six cars,motorcycles, and a boat. He stated the three-car garage on the property was
24 not available to the individuals renting at the Kruegers', so the vehicles and other items had to be
25 parked outside.
26 Doris Mancino, 3626 Harding Street N.E., stated she was presenting a petition to the Planning
27 Commission with signatures from the neighborhood opposing this rezoning request.
28 Commissioner Makowske stated the current land use is R-1 with R-2 as a broader buffer area, and
29 that changing a portion would be spot zoning. He stated there are no other plans for the area in the
30 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and that R-1 is the highest and best use for the property area and
31 should remain R-1 in light of this and neighborhood opposition.
32 Vice Chair Thompson closed the public hearing at 7:25 p.m.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 5
1 Motion by Gondorchin, seconded by Delmonico,to recommend denial of the re-zoning request for
2 Howard and Dorene Krueger as presented, based on the exemption of spot zoning and setting a
3 precedent.
4 Vice Chair Thompson stated that spot zoning sets a precedent.
5 Motion carried unanimously.
6 The Vice Chair invited Mr. Krueger to attend the Council meeting on July 23, 1996, where a final
7 decision will be made.
8
9 VII. MISCELLANEOUS.
10 A. Concept Review of Proposed Attached Garage Addition- Mr. and Mrs. Bill Hedberg, 2509
11 30th Avenue N.E.
12 Mr. Robert Schmidt, 6001 4th Street N.E., Fridley, stated he is representing Mr. and Mr. Hedberg
13 during this garage addition process. Mr. Schmidt gave on overview of the garage addition plans for
14 the Planning Commission. He stated the side yard setback for the garage addition has been reduced
15 from 15 feet to 10 feet. He stated the west side would be five feet from the lot line, with plenty of
16 setback on the east side but full cement driveway to four to five feet from the lot line. Mr. Schmidt
17 stated the garage will be a 20-foot wide two-car garage with a 16-foot door in front and nine-foot
18 door in the back. He stated the Hedberg's' granddaughter is moving in and additional garage space
19 is needed for one car and a trailer, with a small workshop area as well. He stated the exterior will
20 be stucco, consistent with the home, with the same roof line. Mr. Schmidt stated he will be doing
21, the construction with the Hedberg's' son. He stated a certificate of survey has been completed, and
22 offered photographs of the current home for the Commission's review.
23 Commissioner Franzese inquired if a formal survey had been done. Mr. Schmidt stated one was
24 completed three weeks ago.
25 Commissioner Horst stated there currently is a five-foot setback on the existing home and inquired
26 if a variance had been done at some point. Ms. Moore-Sykes stated the home existing before the
27 zoning district was established and would have to research that question.
28 Commissioner Horst inquired if the variance cannot be grandfathered in. Mr. Schmidt stated it
29 cannot as the proposed garage will be attached to the existing home.
30 Commissioner Horst inquired if the existing detached garage will remain. Mr. Schmidt stated the
31 Hedberg's intend to keep the existing garage.
32 Commissioner Horst inquired if the applicants have met the three criteria for a variance. Mr.
33 Schmidt stated they have met the criteria, and will outline the reasons in the application.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 6
1 Commissioner Gondorchin inquired what would be on the neighboring side of the proposed addition.
q g g P P
2 Mr. Schmidt stated there would be a small strip of lawn and remaining cement driveway.
3 Commissioner Gondorchin inquired if the applican ts had any comments from the neighbors
4 regarding this addition. Mr. Schmidt stated the applicants intend to continue to hip style roof which
5 would not interfere with sunlight and view from the street for the neighbors, and therefore had no
6 objections to the addition.
7 Commissioner Makowske reiterated Commissioner Horst's comment on the importance of meeting
8 the variance criteria. Mr. Schmidt stated they had met the criteria and have outlined the reasons in
9 the application. He stated the Hedberg's have spent several thousand dollars during this process,
10 and had no choice in how the garage was originally constructed as they purchased the existing home.
11 Commissioner Gondorchin stated a permit process was developed to address garage addition and
12 suggested the applicants follow this process rather than a variance.
13 Commissioner Franzese noted her neighbors had a garage addition built and had only three feet from
14 the setback area from the eave and did not need a variance.
15 Commissioner Gondorchin stated the permit process may be more appropriate.
16 Discussion was held on City Ordinance 1650.02 (B). Mr. Schmidt stated the construction would
17 meet fire code standards, with 5/8 fire code sheetrock and a 20-minute fire code door.
18 Commissioner Horst stated that staff and the applicant should review the possibility of the permit
19 process in order to avoid a variance.
20 B. Concept Review of the Proposed Addition to St. Anthony Health Care Center, Mike Miller.
21 Mr. Michael Miller, Administrator of St. Anthony Health Care Center, Mr. Michael Trossen,
22 Architect, and Mr. Dwayne Warren, Project Manager, presented to the Planning Commission the
23 concept review for the proposed addition to St. Anthony Health Care Center.
24 Mr. Miller stated the property was subdivided in March to prepare for the expansion and to meet
25 financing needs. He stated the Center received the rights to expand on March 11, 1996, and was the
26 first of 19 submissions to the State for a moratorium on expansion. He stated the addition would
27 include 12 rooms on the lower level, with four-bed wards for residents. Mr. Miller stated the
28 addition would be a two-story, 16,000-square foot addition, for a total of 32,000 square feet on the
29 existing parking lot. He stated the pine tree circle drive at Chandler Place would be eliminated for
30 a 30-foot wide bituminous entrance to the garage area for drop-off and pick-up of residents. He
31 stated that code required 144 parking stalls for this addition, which have been designed.
32 Mr. Miller stated that variances will likely be needed for the following:
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 7
1 1) Parking in the Setback. Parking in the setback at Foss Road and Chandler Drive. He stated
2 the ordinance requires a 30-foot setback when the sideyard is adjacent to a public right-of-
3 way.
4 2) Lot Coverage. Mr. Miller stated the ordinance calls for a maximum of 50% lot coverage for
5 R-4,and that the proposed addition required an increase in parking will cause lot coverage
6 to increase to 56%
7 3) Rear Yard Setback Variance. Mr. Miller stated the addition will require a 25-foot variance
8 in the rear yard due to the close proximity of the existing St. Anthony Health Care Center
9 and Chandler Place. The ordinance requires a rear yard setback of 40 feet.
10 4) Side Yard Setback Variance. Mr. Miller stated the southwest corner of the addition requires
11 a seven-foot variance. The ordinance requires a 15-foot setback for each side.
12 Mr. Miller stated a Conditional Use Permit may be needed to allow a nursing home, but his staff is
13 still unsure. He stated a Conditional Use Permit was not required in 1967 when the facility was
14 built, but is required now.
15 Mr. Miller stated another issue may be the square footage of the proposed rooms. He noted City
16 Ordinance 1630.05,Page 1621, states that regular efficiency units be a minimum of 500 square feet,
17 and one-bedroom be a minimum of 650 square feet. Mr. Miller stated the proposed addition will
18 have units of 260 square feet for efficiency units to 380 square feet for one-bedroom units. He noted
19 the residents of these units will have housekeeping and laundry services provided as well as three
20 meals per day. He stated there have been a number of these types of units built in the Twin Cities
21 area and none approach the 500-square foot size.
22 Mr. Miller noted a neighborhood meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, July 24th at 6:30 in
23 the community room at the Center to inform the neighbors of-the proposed addition and to answer
24 any questions they may have.
25 Commissioner Franzese stated she had seen a recent article that the Center had obtained approval
26 by the Rice Creek Watershed District. Mr. Miller stated he was misquoted, and will soon begin the
27 approval process, but has not as of yet.
28 Commissioner Franzese inquired if the neighboring school will still allow parking on an as-needed
29 basis. Mr. Miller stated he will verify with the new principal, but did not anticipate any problem
30 with his staff parking in the school lot on evenings and weekends when special resident events are
31 being held in order to allow room for additional visitor parking.
32 Commissioner Franzese stated that approval from the Rice Creek Watershed, lot coverage, and the
33 catch basin are all mitigating factors in the approval process. He stated the new addition will allow
34 for all deliveries to be sent to the loading dock.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 8
1 Commissioner Gondorchin inquired if Mr. Miller has spoken with Mr. John Madden regarding his
2 concerns for the addition. Mr. Miller stated he has spoken with Mr. Madden on several occasions
3 regarding the project.
4 Mr. Miller noted the catch basin has been sufficient even during hard rains.
5 Commissioner Gondorchin inquired if the additional parking has raised any fire protection issues
6 by Chief Johnson. Mr. Miller stated he has received approval by Chief Johnson for fire vehicles to
7 drive in the circle area and back out.
8 Commissioner Horst inquired how emergency calls are handled at the Center. Mr. Miller stated that
9 the drop-off area is used for emergencies at Chandler Place and the Foss Road entrance is used for
10 emergencies at the Center.
11 Commissioner Horst inquired how main traffic flow is handled. Mr. Miller stated traffic goes
12 diagonally to Foss Road. He stated the main entrance on Foss Road is used for traffic flow.
13 Commissioner Franzese congratulated Mr. Miller on receiving approval by the State for the
14 expansion.
15
16 Commissioner Franzese inquired of the moratorium approval list. Mr. Miller stated there were four
17 approved of the 19 applications; three in the metro area and one in northern Minnesota. He stated
18 there will likely be 25 new applications this year, with only three or four approved due to limited
19 resources.
20 Vice Chair Thompson stated this will be a nice project and admired Mr. Miller's ambition. Mr.
21 Miller stated that footings are scheduled for this fall,then a temporary reconfiguration of parking
22 during construction with a first course of blacktop and fence on the lot perimeter. He stated the
23 construction should be complete within one year,then remodeling of the lower level rooms will take
24 place so no residents will need to relocate.
25 C. Letter from Ramsey County RE: Bridge Renovation on Silver Lake Road.
26- Ms. Moore-Sykes stated a letter was received from Ramsey County regarding planned renovations
27 of the bridge over the railroad tracks on Silver Lake Road. She stated the Council asked that it be
28 shared with the Planning Commission for their consideration regarding any streetscaping ideas for
29 the area, such as lighting, decorative sidewalk surfaces, plantings, etc.
30 Commissioner Gondorchin inquired who would pay for the streetscaping costs. Ms. Moore-Sykes
31 stated the City would pay for the costs.
32
33 Commissioner Gondorchin stated that a vibrant, inviting color should be incorporated into any
34 streetscape plan as the area could serve as a gateway to the new Apache Plaza.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 9
1 Commissioner Gondorchin stated that any landscaping must be maintained in order to remain
2 attractive. He cited Hiawatha Avenue streetscape as an example of landscaping not maintained.
3 Commissioner Franzese stated this is a"Catch-22" situation, as it is a priority item because of traffic.
4 She stated she encouraged Ms.Moore-Sykes to contact Ramsey County to obtain their five-year plan
5 for projects such as these.
6 Commissioner Gondorchin cited Trillium Park as an example of a good visual impact.
7 Commissioner Makowske inquired who would maintain any streetscaping project. Ms. Moore-
8 Sykes stated it would be the City's responsibility to maintain the areas.
9 Commissioner Delmonico noted the area from the railroad tracks goes from businesses to parks,
10 encompassing Rapid Oil,Amoco,Taco Bell, etc. Ms. Moore-Sykes stated the area could be made
11 more aesthetically pleasing.
12 Vice Chair Thompson noted the area near Silver Lake Road and County Road D is very nice, as
13 Silver Lake can now be seen.
14 D. Comments.
15 Ms. Moore-Sykes noted a letter was included in the Commission packet regarding the Verkins
16 Addition. She stated Mildred Verkins would like to sell the property adjacent to Highway 88 for use
17 in construction of twin or town homes, and would like to know what position the City will take on
18 a project such as this. She stated the current R-1 zoning district use was grandfathered in during the
19 1960s, and if not used for a 12-month period then the rights are lost.
20 Commissioner Gondorchin stated a concept review would be needed. Commissioner Horst stated
21 this would be similar to the rezoning request earlier on the agenda.
22 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated that Mr. Larry Hamer, Public Works Director, received a letter from Tom
23 Schroeder, 3929 Fordham Drive, stating he is planning to complete the work on the exterior of his
24 home by mid-August. She stated staff was not sure what prompted the letter. .
25 Ms. Moore-Sykes stated a preliminary site plan was included in the packet for a proposed SAVII
26 Liquor store. She stated that the City and First Bank had renegotiated the existing lease until the
27 new store could be built. She stated the plan placed the liquor store in the back third of the building,
28 and noted one or two variances may be needed.
29 Commissioner Franzese noted that vibrations generated by the adjoining automotive shop may be
30 an issue to the liquor store with the bottles on site.
31 Commissioner Franzese inquired if anyone attended the Metropolitan Livable Communities
32 workshop. No one stated they attended.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
July 16, 1996
Page 10
1 Commissioner Franzese stated an article was written in the Bloomington newspaper regarding
2 control tower issues and regulations on placement and height limitations. Ms. Moore-Sykes stated
3 that TEA Group of Atlanta, the company looking to lease tower space in St. Anthony, went
4 elsewhere when the City stated that the lease would be$1,000 per month.
5 Commissioner Franzese inquired of the progress of CUB Foods. Ms. Moore-Sykes stated there was
6 now a large retention pond in place, with the building pad beginning August 1 st.
7 Commissioner Horst inquired why the 60-foot glass section of the current plan differed from the
8 origin_al plan. He noted it.appeared to now be an additional entrance into the mall.
9
10 VII. ADJOURNMENT.
11 Motion by Horst, seconded by Delmonico, to adjourn the meeting at 8:42 p.m.
12
13 Motion carried unanimously.
14
15 Respectfully submitted,
16 Cathy Sorensen
17 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 20, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant
ITEM: Request for Subdivision of Property --
Arnold Gregory, Arnold Development
Auditors Subdivision 377, Blocks 2 and 4, Old Hwy. 8
BACKGROUND.
Arnie Gregory, developer for the Arbors Townhomes, has requested that Blocks 2 and 4 of
Auditor's Subdivision 377 be subdivided in order to replat. The replatting would accom-
modate revised construction plans to build six townhomes with master bedrooms on the
main floor.- In order to accomplish this, the revised master bedroom plans require
additional floor area on the lower level that by eliminating one unit in each of the two
buildings would provide.
If his request to replat the property is approved, it would lessen the density of the project
which would reduce traffic and noise in the development. Mr. Gregory felt this reduction
in the density would be a benefit to neighboring properties as well.
RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends that this request for subdivision of property be approved. The proposed
subdivision and replatting will not affect any setback variances already approved nor will
he need to. request additional variances to construct the larger townhomes. Staff has not
received any responses=from the neighbors to Mr. Gregory's:request to subdivide his
property.
Date: `
Fee:—
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION/PLAT APPROVAL
Applicant: �� ve� �Ll Phone:
Address: Y4- 4�- `015`4-d 2-
Status of Applicant (Owner, Buyer, Renter, Agent, etc.):_
Present Legal Description of Property to be Affected:
Proposed Legal Description of Property to be Affected:
Street Address:
Zoning District in Which Property is Located: _
Specify Any Necessary Easements:
Area of the Plat/Subdivision:
Number of Parcels:
Attach a copy of the proposed plat showing the proposed name of the plat, the
location within the City, the names of the present owners, the scale, the date of
preparation, the northpoint, surrounding property, all public utilities and easements and
other such necessary information or documentation as is requested by the City
Manager or the subdivision/platting ordinance.
*150o006,K
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing
on Tuesday, August 20, 1996, at 7:05 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible, in
the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road (enter northeast
comer) for the following purpose:
Applicant: Arnie Gregory, Arnold Development
Property-Address: 2926, 2930, 2938, and 3004 Old Highway 8 (The
Arbors)
Proposal: Subdivision of property to allow for the replatting
of auditors Subdivision 377, Blocks 2 and 4.
Anyone wishing to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at
said time and place. Questions regarding this matter may be referred to the
Management Assistant, 789-8881. Auxiliary aids are available upon request at
least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk at 789-8881 to make
arrangements.
Kim Moore-Sykes
Management Assistant
Publish: St. Anthony Bulletin
August 7, 1996
JUL, 31. 1996 5: 17PM J BUXELL ARCH LTD N0, 0117 P. 1
a,ch
�l
{
t �
4
. � A
\ I
n
f POSF-M F4lt NoLD 7717 �" 7
1- n..r 7dt�-ass{ Peen• 31$'377
Fnc� 7b/.-ir..s: d33 gDti/o
v '
T 105
2 i R ; so Te.3a
(2) ; 7
1= i (49) .6
130 _ II N Io 0 ry e ��� (44)
^ (3) ^ 1 b ''P i i vt �►
1 A, I A 62.5 i 7
75 ao^ rep R_/+ _ 435.64 _ R _ �'~ VAC 6-26.59
.n Ft 1, LOT 2
i. (4) ^ _— 1 1 i
0'
130 �`3►• 3 gmb �ti• (4) . ,,2:...
10 9 , 6 •C
130 (10)
(II) (10) �. t
(9) y /
9
73 1 48.6 26.2
130 (82) 7s R.1� s;t
+e ,
93 R• 3 d (6)
i
A 7 0 11
(7) (14)
(70) 6
16L 8 �
130 y 7(69) A ° (7)
ti F
� e Is 6(68) tih q� l�l6jJ
(8) (15) ; s(67) ^ �� •t �y
130 1 '� O 0 ' '
(71)
4
h 9 (66) (72) c� /
^ 16 3 R 11 h
130 1 (64) by (81) 12
135 (63) 13 (74)
to (75)
(10) 14 h
(76) ti
17 _- 15(77 ti`' ••/
( 17)
� s 1
"A* 135 1(781
12 17
a 19 1 (79)
11 (80)
_ 18 Sb1
�� •+� ,tP 'tip �6
135
s j�Q a
,q h PART OF
D$: LOT 19 1
eo (61) ~ 'o / O
. •.• 160.6 '
i
536•. c
S 1 1 PART OF
(25) , LOT 20 i �O
I 119.SS i (62) `,� •��� _ 4 .�
1 �� ••` ;�
SV ,'(22) /
-
30 30 1
is.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
hereby certify that I placed the attached Notice of Hearing for
in the U.S. Mail on the below specified date.
Date:
Signature:-&-.w I c-CJ
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 20, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant VZ
ITEM: Lot Area Variance Request,
Bruce Nedegaard, Nedegaard Construction .
Outlot C, Fordham.Drive.
BACKGROUND.
Bruce Nedegaard, owner of Nedegaard Construction is requesting a variance for lot area
and size for his property located at Outlot C, Fordham Drive. Originally, this property
was to be replatted along with the property at 3929 Fordham Drive owned by Tom and
Diane Schroeder in order to make both properties conforming residential lots. As a result
of the City amending its lot coverage ordinance, Mr. and Mrs. Schroeder later decided to
remodel their current residence, leaving Mr. Nedegaard with a residential lot that is not
buildable because it does not meet the City's ordinance regarding lot size and area.
Currently, the lot is 67.51 feet in width and 8,776.3 square feet. The City's ordinance
requires that a buildable residential interior lot be 75 feet wide and 9,000 square feet.
Outlot. C requires a variance of 7.49 feet in width and 223.7 square feet.
RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends that this request for a lot area and size variance be approved. It is the
Staff's opinion but for the untimely amendment to the lot coverage ordinance, Mr.
Nedegaard would have ha&ae conforming residential lot. The amending of this ordinance
caused Mr. Nedegaard an unforeseen hardship by limiting his ability to develop this lot.
The'City received one telephone call in favor of Mr. Nedegaard's development plans for
the lot and one in opposition. We have received no other opinions via telephone or mail.
JUL-29-1996 11:27 NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES 612 757 0649 P.03i07
Fee:
......$ 60.00
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
Petition for Variance
Applicant: -Ld e tw '
Address: / 7' r q1 G � Phone:
Status of applicant (owner, buyer, renter, agent, etc.): f�j2�r'�&If
Street address and/or legal description of property petitioned for variance:
5
r
V1d4*r,
Zoning district in which property is located: A� —A-e- •-
Request: /W /IQ) It LVO b/L-1L"ty u d
0, CM fp a,_f
n�m
Minnesota Statutesi and City Ordinances require that the following conditions must be
satisfied for approval of this request. Please respond to these conditions using additional
sheets, if necessary.
i. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the parcel of land involved, the proposed variance would relieve an
undue hardship. as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, should the
applicable ordinance be strictly enforced.
2. The purpose of the proposed variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to
Increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but would correct
extraordina circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other
property in the vicinity or zoning district.
I The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by Ci Ordinance and has not been
created by any persons presently having an Interest in the parcel of land.
Signature of Applicant
JUL-29-1996 11:2? NEDEGAARD CUSTOM HOMES 612 757 0649 P.02i07
!2 O D 64
I AAQD CU&TOM HOMES
RTHDALE BLVD. COON RAPIDS,MN 55448 (612)757.2926 FAX 757-09
July 29, 1996
Kim Sikes
City of St. Anthony
3301 Silver Lake Road
St.Anthony, MN
Dear Kim,
Nedegaard Construction is requesting a variance on Outlot C of the Village Commons.
Originally it was agreed that we receive part of Schroeder's property and in turn he was to
receive part of Outlot D however,he has decided to remodel his home and is no longer
willing to give the portion needed to build a residential home on Outlot C. Currently the
lot is 67.51 feet instead of 75 feet. We know this is a non-conforming lot but we will
-build a home that conforms to the lot. If we do not get this variance,Nedegaard
Construction will suffer the loss of a single family homesite which was originally
Planned..
Sincerely,
A
Druce A.Nedegaard
President
A DIVISION OF NEDEGAARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.
LN
LIC. NO.0002068 n-
ri::a. :
HY-LAND SURVEYING INVOICE NO. 9185
F. B. NO.
LAND SURVEYORS LSCALE 1" ��'
Proposed Top of Block o Denotes Iron Monument
Proposed Garage Floor a Denotes Wood Hub Set
7845 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Park,Minnesota 55445 For Excavation Only
Proposed Lowest Floor 560-1984 x000.0 Denotes Existhq Elevation
Type of Building - O Denotes Proposed Elevation
p� -4*+ Denotes Surface Drainage
NOTE: Property located in part of Section _
NEDEGAARD CONSTRUCTION_ Township Range
' C�Y,•1e C�2o9(nGr=v
QES��eNC6'
t•
Z ° O
n/ \ .4
0
o j
1 -
OUTLOT C, THE VILLAGE COMMONS
The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by
client.
I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under
my direct supervision, and that 1 am a duly Registered Land
Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
ftmed
Surmyedbyusws 26thdayot Duly 19 96 Milton E. Hykmd� inn: Reg. No. 20262
m
s
n
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
VARIANCE PETITION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing
on Tuesday, August 20, 1996, at 7:05 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible, in
the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road (enter northeast
comer) for the following purpose:
Applicant: Bruce Nedegaard, Nedegaard Construction
1814 Northdale Boulevard, Coon Rapids, MN
Property Address: Outlot C of Village Commons (Fordham Drive)
Proposal: A variance request for area and width of a non- ,
conforming residential (R-1) lot. The petitioner is
requesting a variance of 7.5 feet in lot width and
225 square feet in lot area so that a residential
structure can be placed on this R-1 lot.
Anyone wishing to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at
said time and place. Questions regarding this matter may be referred to the
Management As 789-8881. Auxiliary aids are available upon request at
least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk at 789-8881 to make
arrangements.
Kim Moore-Sykes
Management Assistant
Publish: St. Anthony Bulletin
August 7, 1996
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
hereby certify that I placed the attached Notice of Hearing for
in the U.S. Mail on the below specified date.
Date: 9
Signature:
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 20, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant
ITEM: Request for Side Yard Setback Variance --
William & Evelyn Hedberg, 2509-30th Avenue N.E..
BACKGROUND.
William and Evelyn Hedberg, 2509 - 30th Avenue N.E., have submitted an application for
a side'yard setback variance of 5 feet in order to construct a 20 foot by 24 foot 2-car garage
that will be attached to the east side their home.
Currently, the owners have a single car garage that sets back from.the house and-five feet
from the property line. The proposed attached 2-car garage would sit in front of the .
existing single car garage. The variance is needed because the west side of the house sits
five feet from the property line as well. The combined side yard setbacks for this property
is 10 feet; the City ordinance requires a combined total of 15 feet for side yard setbacks.
When Staff asked about adding to the existing garage structure, the owners indicated that
they had a need for the additional garage space and that attaching it to their home would
provide security to them both from the weather and possible criminal activity that might
be directed at them because of their age. Their proposed attached double car garage would
have two doors, one in the front and the other in the back so that they can have access to
the existing garage that will sit behind the proposed garage. The existing garage will be
used to store equipment.
The owners were advised by Staff to apply for a variance rather than obtaining a garage
setback permit because the double car garage addition is being attached to the house,
thereby making it a part of the principal structure of the property. When an accessory
building (including garages) is attached to the principal structure of the property, then the
setback requirements of the principal structure apply (Section 1650.02, Subd. 3). The City
Attorney was contacted and concurred with Staff's interpretation of the City Ordinance.
Staff have also received several telephone calls and a signed petition from neighbors in
opposition to the proposed construction of the attached double car garage. A letter from
the owners' immediate neighbor to the east was also received stating that they are
concerned with the potential loss of visibility as the result of this project. Many were also
concerned about what it would look like with two garages on the same property.
They felt that something could be constructed that would meet the owners' needs and be
acceptable to the neighbors.
RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends that this request for a five foot variance to the side yard setback be
denied based on the amount of neighbor opposition presented.
Fee:
(R-1............$ 60.00
Other.........$100.00)
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
t Petition for Variance
Applicant:
Address: 250 l y(-- (JE Phone: -79 1 - -749 1
Status of applicant (owner, buyer, renter, agent, etc.):
Street ad address and/or legal description of property petitioned for variance:
Zoning district in which property is located:
Request: ()6-J L P,KCo +0 W-C� -6
Minnesota Statutes and City Ordinances require that the following conditions must be
satisfied for approval of this request.. Please respond to these conditions using additional
sheets, if necessary.
1. Because of the .particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the parcel of land involved, the proposed variance would relieve an
undue hardship, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, should the
applicable ordinance be strictly enforced.
. 2. The purpose of the proposed variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to
increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but would correct
extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other
property in the vicinity or zoning district.
3. The alleged difficulty"or hardship is caused by City Ordinance and has not been
created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel of land.
G
Signature of Applicant
07=12=96A * 60 0008
.
Subject: Uariance Request by William and Euelyn Hedberg
I am sure that when our home was built in the 58's that one car
garages were considered a luxury. Rs time has progressed one car garages
haue become an oddity rather than the norm. Most new homes come equipped
with two or three car garages.
The building of a two car attached garage to our home to within fiue
feet of the east lot line seems to only make sense. If we were required to
follow the present guidelines, our garage would end up'being approximate
fifteen feet wide and would neither allow full use of our property or parking
of two uehicies inside.
With the aduent of second cars, boats, trailers and other large storage
items, the necessity for a two car garage becomes euident. The absence of
the urban blight created by the inside storage of these items can be readily
seen In neighborhoods where two car garage are abound. Being able to
accomplish this would allow us to continue our beautification and upgrading
of our home as we haue been doing for the past two years.
Rs we haue just purchased this property in the past two years, we
don't feel we can be held responsible for the poor placement of the garage on
the property as it now exists. Had the original owner put a little more
thought into this matter, maybe the garage would haue been placed further
back on the property or attached as we are attempting to do now. This action
would certainly reflect the current character of the neighborhood as we see it
now.
Finally we come to the issue of our age. Being in the 70's, we have
many concerns regarding our safety for both ourselves and our property. With
our present arrangements, we are continually forced to battle the elements
both summer and winter going from the car to the house. Ice is a constant
reminder of our desire not to suffer a fall during the winter and in the
balance of the year wind and rain must be dealt with. Rlso who can forget
that prowlers do prey on elderly and we feel this would offer us some added
protection.
We feel that ultimately, with the ability to build our garage as we haue
suggested, we can construct a suitable structure for our storage, that is safe
for us to use, blends in with the other homes in the neighborhood and will
fulfill the councils wished to haue continued quality construction in our city.
In the next fifteen to twenty years though, when our property does become
for sale, we feel that this decision will reflect well on this council and
leaues an impression that you continue to encourage planned family
deuelopment in St. Rnthony.
Thank you for your consideration
William and Euelyn Hedberg.
Uiew showing proximity to the neighbors house to the east.
" r
Rr• .s G'y'T.+ 1
1.
1
Uiew of balance of front yard and neighbors garage to the east of our
property.
O
Y
' � I
cy
Mew showing approximate outside wall permitted under
the present code. Note the Uiew of the rear garage that would result
if constructed in this manner.
25oli 3 O I-` AU6 N F-
St iA NT t�Q y ` w�N
I
1�1
S�
CT
39� �X15r�N(o fkoposccl
HOC.�SL 24• PRoPoszi-b 2q':- ,5
ArrAcv,d=p
GAZA roE �
DRkvF-WAS—_
20'
,35 t`u
fI
75 .lf--
(� (�
z m s �-
ry � �► m �, Z
UA
G N
Q G
� -�
Z LA
� z � �
August 3rd, 1996
Francis and Rose Ann Grewe
2513 30th AVE NE
St. Anthony Village, MN 55418
St. Anthony Village Planning Commission
St. Anthony Village, MN 55418
Planning Commission members,
We, Francis and Rose Ann Grewe, have lived at 2513 30th AVE NE, St.
Anthony Village since 1955 (41 years). For all these years we have enjoyed
the same view from our side kitchen window where we sit at the kitchen table
and watch the outside activity. We have learned that our neighbors to the
West, William and.Evelyn Hedberg, at 2509 30th AVE NE, have submitted a
request for a building permit to build an attached double car garage in front of
their existing detached single car garage. The new garage would be attached
to the house so access to the garage in the winter could be.achieved without
having to go outside. Building of this new garage would block the existing
view we have from our kitchen window, this we do NOT want to have
happen. We are asking the planning commission to NOT approve the building
permit requested by our neighbors.
We have approached our neighbors to try and reach and agreeable building
plan which would allow them to achieve their goal of an attached double car
garage and also preserve our view. We have suggested that the new double
car garage be built in the location of the existing single car garage with the
new garage moved towards the street just far enough to attach to the house.
This modified plan would not obstruct our existing view, which we have so
enjoyed over the years. We strongly feel that removal of this_view would
reduce the.value of our home..We feel that altering the.plansJo.move the - .
double car garage back far enough not to obstruct the view would give the .
neighbors the garage.they seek, preserves our existing view the property
value for both homes.
Page 1 of 3
The existing building ordinances for St. Anthony Village are stated in Section
1650 - General Regulations. We would like you to call your attention to
Section 1650.02 subparagraph 6 (b).
In granting or denying the setback permit, the Council will
consider the proximity of the garage to any structures on the
adjoining property, the extent of vegetation or other screening
on the subject property and the adjoining property, the effect of
the garage on the light, and the visibility available to the .
adjoining property, matters of fire safety, the existing garages on
the adjoining property, the ability to locate garages elsewhere on
the subject property, and any other matters which may be
relevant to the degree of encroachment into the setback.
The building of the proposed garage will greatly effect the light and visibility
we so much enjoy and have,enjoyed for 41 years. The building of the
proposed new garage will significantly block the view we have today from
our kitchen window of the street.
We are more.thanwilling to cooperate with our neighbors in this matter and
are supportive of their need for a.double garage. However, we feel there are
other options available that will satisfy their need for an attached double
garage that will not impact our kitchen view and property value.
We ask the planning commission to NOT grant the variances required to issue
the building permit requested to construct the new double car garage. Below
are signatures from all our neighbors who live on the block which support us
in requesting DENIAL of this building permit.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter. We look forward meeting
with any or all of the planning commission members to discuss this finther.
Sincerely,
Francis and Rose Ann Grewe
Page 2 of 3
Block Owners opposing approval of variance(s) and permit to build new double
car garage inhibiting view.
-ZSO X04 (+J i= N`E
5r.-
/
zGao - 3o-474 Ave, 10E.
Page 3 of 3
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
VARIANCE PETITION
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing
on Tuesday, August 20, 1996, at 7:05 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible, in
the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road (enter northeast
comer) for the following purpose:
Applicant: William Hedberg
Property Address: 2509-30th Avenue NE
Proposal: A 5 foot variance from the 15 foot side yard set
back required by Ordinance to allow construction
of an attached, two car garage.
Anyone wishing to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at
said time and place. Questions regarding this matter may be referred to the
Management Assistant 789-8881. Auxiliary aids are available upon request at
least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk at 789-8881 to make
arrangements.
Kim Moore-Sykes
Management Assistant
Publish: St. Anthony Bulletin
August 7, 1996
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I,
hereby certify that I placed the attached Notice of Hearing for
� r �cirr cc S v�l-30�•
in the U.S. Mail on the below specified date.
Date:
Signature: t--,�
STAFF REPORT
DATE: -August 20, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant
ITEM: Request for Condition Use Permit -- Mike Miller,
St. Anthony Health Care Center Addition,
3700 Foss Road
BACKGROUND.
Mike Miller, Administrator and owner of the St. Anthony Health Care Center has filed an
application for a Conditional Use Permit in order to build an addition to the St. Anthony
Health Care Center that will expand the size of-the nursing home and assisted living health
care center. The proposed addition will have two floors which will add 16,000 square feet
for the nursing home and another 16,000 on the second floor for assisted living units. The
proposed conditional use is a use that is specifically listed in the City's Zoning Ordinance
as permitted in this zoning district.
The owners recently received approval from the State of Minnesota to expand the size of
the facility so as to accommodate the construction of 2-bed rooms that will replace the
current 4-bed rooms. The approval is required before any nursing home facility can
expand and it was determined by the State that St. Anthony Health Care Center was most
in need of expanding by assigning their application first priority. The facility will not be
increasing the number of beds, only the number of rooms, which will provide more livable
space and privacy to the residents of the facility.
The St. Anthony Health Care Center has been operating at this site for twenty-nine (29)
years in the same capacity. Despite the long history this facility has in the City, the
Center has not been shown to be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of
anyone residing or working in the vicinity of the facility. It has also not been detrimental
to property values in the area.
In addition to obtaining the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed expansion, the
owners need to obtain several variances because of the unique situation of this property
and that of Chandler Place. It has long been recognized that both Chandler Place and St.
Anthony Care Center lack adequate parking. This is evidenced by the amount of parking
that occurs on Foss Road and Chandler Drive. Part of this proposed expansion project
will be to provide additional visitor parking on.site. Parking plans have been submitted
that show parking spaces in the parking setbacks of Chandler Place on Chandler Drive side
and St. Anthony Care Center on the Foss Road side.
The City Parking Ordinance requires 30-foot setbacks when parking is adjacent to public
rights-of-way. Staff have determined that the curb cuts are far enough from the corners of
37th Avenue N.E. of each affected sidestreet that it will not pose a hazard to motorists. If
the owners' variance request to park in the parking setback is denied, they will then be
required to obtain a parking variance for eight spaces.
Because of financing requirements established through HUD, subdivision of the property
was done earlier this year creating separate lots for Chandler Place and St. Anthony Health
Care Center.. This was done to insure that funds to be used for the expansion went to the
St. Anthony Health Care Center only. But in creating two separate lots to facilitate
financing of the proposed addition, the existing facilities are in close proximity to each
other. The proposed addition to the St. Anthony Health Care Center will now require a
.25 foot variance for the rear yard and a seven foot sideyard setback in order to be
constructed.
The proposed expansion will also require the owners to also obtain a variance for lot
coverage. Because of the need for increased parking and the proposed addition, the total
coverage by impervious surfaces of both lots is 123,401 square feet; the combined total
square footage of the lots is 218,980, which translates to a lot coverage of 56%. The City.
Ordinance allows a maximum of 50% lot coverage in.an R-4 zoning district. Therefore,
the owners are required to obtain a lot coverage variance of 13,911 square feet.
RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends that this request.for a Conditional Use Permit for the expansion of use
for the St. Anthony Health Care Center be approved contingent upon obtaining approval
for the variance requests described herein.
Mr. Miller held a neighborhood meeting to discuss plans for the expansion. Staff have
received no responses from any of the property owners or neighbors.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 20, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant
ITEM: Lot Coverage Variance Request --
Mike Miller, St. Anthony Health Care Center
BACKGROUND.
Mike Miller, Administrator and owner of the St. Anthony Health Care Center has filed an
application for a variance to the City's Lot Coverage Ordinance requirement. The
ordinance requires that lot coverage may not exceed 50% in an R-4 zoning district. The
proposed lot coverage to accommodate the proposed addition.and requisite parking spaces
is.56%.
ANALYSIS.
Again, the variance for lot coverage is necessary in order to complete the proposed
addition-and provide the required number of parking spaces. If the variance request is not
approved,'the St. Anthony Health Care facility will not be able construct the proposed
addition meant to alleviate the crowding conditions that four beds to a room creates.
The State of Minnesota recognized their need to build the proposed addition by granting
them an exception to the moritorium that is in place to prevent the construction of
additional nursing homes or expanding the number of beds for a nursing home facility. By
adhering strictly to the City's rear yard setbackrequirement, St. Anthony Health Care
facility will not be able to construct their proposed addition, thereby causing an undue
hardship to continue to-exist: -
Staff advised Mr. Miller of the need to also contact the Rice Creek Watershed District to
determine if the current storm water retention pond will be adequate to accommodate the
storm water run-off from the proposed increase in impervious surfaces. There.will be not
a significant or detrimental impact to the storm water retention pond that drains Chandler
Place and St. Anthony Health Care facility should this variance request be approved. The
current lot coverage for both facilities is approximately 52%.
The purpose of the proposed variance is not based solely on a desire to increase the value
or income potential of this property, but will correct overcrowding with an updated and
modern nursing home facility.
RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends that the lot coverage variance request for St. Anthony Health Care
Center be approved to allow the proposed lot coverage of 56%.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 20, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant
ITEM: Rear Yard Setback Variance Request --
Mike Miller, St. Anthony Health Care Center
BACKGROUND.
Mike Miller, Administrator and owner of the St. Anthony Health Care Center has filed an
application for a variance to the City's Rear Yard Setback Ordinance requirement. The
ordinance requires that the rear yard must have a depth eaqual to the greater of 20% of the
entire lot or 40 feet in an R-4 zoning district.
Because of the need to subdivide the property for the financing of the addition to the St.
Anthony Health Care Center, the rear yard of the proposed addition will be 15 feet instead
of that required by the City's Ordinance.
ANALYSIS.
Again, the variance to the rear yard setback is necessary in order to complete the proposed
addition. If the variance request is not approved, the St. Anthony Health Care facility will
not be able to alleviate the crowding conditions that four beds to a room creates.
The State of Minnesota recognized their need to build the proposed addition by granting
them an exception to the moritorium that is in place to prevent the construction of
additional nursing homes or expanding the number of beds for a nursing home facility. By
adhering strictly to the City's rear yard setbackrequirement, St. Anthony He_alth_Care
facility will not be able to construct their proposed addition, thereby causing an undue
hardship to continue to exist.
The rear yard in question is adjacent to Chandler Place, which is owned and administered
by the same owners of the St. Anthony Health Care facility. There also exists an easement
between the two existing facilities further-south along the same lot line that allows for the
transport of meals from the kitchen of the St. Anthony Health Care facility to the dining
area of Chandler Place. There will be not detrimental impact to Chandler Place should
this variance request be approved.
The purpose of the proposed variance is not based solely on a desire to increase the value
or income potential of this property, but will correct overcrowding with an updated and
modern nursing home facility.
RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends that the rear yard setback variance request for St. Anthony Health Care
Center be approved.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 20, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant
ITEM: Sideyard Setback Variance Request --
Mike Miller, St. Anthony Health Care Center
BACKGROUND.
Mike Miller, Administrator and owner of the St. Anthony Health Care Center has filed an
application for a seven (7) foot variance to the City's Side Yard Setback Ordinance
requirement. The ordinance requires that there must be two side yards with a minimum
width of 15 feet between the property line and the side of a structure in an R-4 zoning
district.
As the result of the need to subdivide the property for the financing of the addition to the
St. Anthony Health Care Center, the side yard of the proposed addition at the SW corner
will be 8 feet instead of the required 15 feet. It is only at this corner that the variance is
required.
ANALYSIS.
The variance to the sideyard setback is necessary in order to complete the proposed
addition. If the variance request is not approved, the St. Anthony Health Care facility will
not be able to alleviate the crowding conditions that 4 beds to a room creates.
The State of Minnesota recognized their need to build the proposed addition by granting
them an exception to the moritorium that is in place to prevent-the construction of
additional nursing homes or expanding the number of'beds for a nursing home facility. By
adhering strictly to the City's Ordinance requiring a 15 foot sideyard, St. Anthony Health
Care facility will not be able to construct their proposed addition, thereby causing an
undue hardship to continue to exist.
The side yard in question is adjacent to Chandler Place, which is owned and administered
by the same owners of the St. Anthony Health Care facility. There also exists an easement
between the two existing facilities further south along the same lot line that allows for the
transport of meals from the kitchen of the St. Anthony Health Care facility to the dining
area of Chandler Place. There will be not detrimental impact to Chandler Place should
this variance request be approved.
The purpose of the proposed variance is not based solely on a desire to increase the value
or income potential of this property, but will correct overcrowding with an updated and
modern nursing home facility.
RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends that the sideyard setback variance request of 7 feet for the SW corner of
St. Anthony Health Care Center be approved.
STAFF REPORT
DATE: August 20, 1996
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Kim Moore-Sykes, Management Assistant
ITEM: Variance Request for Parking in the Setback --
Mike Miller, St. Anthony Health Care Center
BACKGROUND.
Mike Miller, Administrator and owner of the St. Anthony Health Care Center has filed an
application for a fifteen (15) foot variance to park in the sideyard setbacks at Foss Road
and Chandler Drive. The ordinance requires a thirty (30) foot setback when the sideyard
is adjacent to a public right-of-way. Parking plans.have been submitted that show four
parking spaces in the parking setbacks of Chandler Place on Chandler Drive side and St.
Anthony Care Center on the Foss Road side.
Mr..Miller is requesting this variance because the expansion of the St. Anthony Health
Care Center will need a minimum of 144 parking spaces on site as required by the City's
Parking Ordinance. It has long been recognized that both Chandler Place and St. Anthony
Care Center lack adequate parking. This is evidenced by the amount of parking that
occurs on Foss Road and Chandler Drive. Showing parking spaces in the setback allows
him to meet the required number of spaces for his facility and proposed addition. He feels
that getting a variance to parking in the setback is a better solution to the parking situation
than asking for a variance that forgives the eight parking spaces.
The curb cuts on both Foss Road and Chandler Drive meet the minimum width
requirement of the Parking Ordinance and are far enough from the intersections of 37th
Avenue N.E./Foss Road and 37th Avenue N.E./Chandler Drive so as not to obstruct the
view of motorists entering or exiting the sidestreets to either facility.
Staff have determined that the curb cuts are far enough from the corners of 37th Avenue
N.E. of each affected sidestreet that it will not pose a hazard to motorists. If the owners'
variance request to park in the parking setback is denied, they will then be required to
obtain a parking variance for the eight spaces. There is no surrounding property available
for purchase to accommodate the eight parking spaces needed.
The State of Minnesota recognized their need to build the proposed addition by granting
them an exception to the moritorium that is in place to prevent the construction of
additional nursing homes or expanding the number of beds for a nursing home facility. By
adhering strictly to the City's Ordinance requiring a 30 foot parking setback, St. Anthony
Health Care facility will not be able to construct their proposed addition, thereby causing
an undue hardship for their residents to continue to exist.
RECOMMENDATION.
Staff recommends that the parking setback variance request of 15 feet be approved.
ST . ANTHONY HEALTH CENTER
Quality Care in.a Homelike Environment _
3700 FOSS ROAD NE ST. ANTHONY, MN 55421 -PHONE (612). 788-9673 FAX 788-0104
July 15, 1996 ,
Kim Moore-Sykes
St. Anthony Village
3301 Silver Lake Road
St. Anthony,-MN 55418-1699
-Dear Ms. Sykes:
The attached variance requests-pertain to an expansion of St. Anthony Health Center. The .
proposed project will add approximately 16,000 square feet of nursing home space and
16,000 square feet of assisted living apartments on floor 2. The State of Minnesota,
Department of Health approved this.project on March 11, 1996.
We request approval.of the variances which will relieve the hardship we have had for many
years, of housing 4 •residents per room on our lower level. The only feasible solution to this
problem is to use our available land to construct a new 24 bed wing, allowing the 12-4 bed
wards to be converted to 2 bed rooms._ Our nursing home is the only facility licensed in
St. Anthony to provide skilled care. This makes our variance. request unique to this site.
Through creative site planning we are not requiring a variance for the number of parking
stalls.
Should you have further questions,"please-contact the"writer at 788-9673. ,
Sincerely,
Michael Miller
Administrator
C:\DWG\ANTHONY\DD\NEWW117.DWG 7-12-98
W
rn
o
x �
LTJ Z
9' ll
m # B m o l a w o- • p .O
-1 II w , r pp Dp z 0 33 m
M
g v
P X
q
1
--IIr M TpO11pN1 CLKE
G 1 1 14•puSTIC OAS NA01 -
E
+ --•CHANDLER r UP.wAl[II sw.1« ��e�n,rAT1n NAw DRIVE
+ 1 . 1 s . . • 1 1 .-
0'v.CA.-1•TARY SERVI« ORTN —Ze-v.e.v.&wYARY wwA a4as now
N I1� n N N
STORM sEWA 1 om1 now 1' 31 $3 N r SIQL OAS MAIN r•KC P.ST�l store 1.M no. ooNaeit ame
+ •_ �`• ,'.t..i:• -IRON---
r s I
rum I N o y • 0 1 bb.m3 Gov a -
caNORCTE aRa \
+ $ q 3
. p� 142.24
37 8� •10.02 8 70.19
D (P o f saes g
o • _ U
weNANC Y 6-bTORY 6TNCG0 BUILOINS
[] +
Ij. '! �• 4120 `- [IECTAIC. 9 r. °
i oomaT
aos o $t': '.� I.:IO ® d f
g m I x �� 1•'� g �
y r qq A� 3 \ r o tbA/r�o uM .•i'�'1 1� h q
------------ -� - _ s
Ei _ tprJ4614*180151 6 1061
r 00- 11
D 11w7 DO p O°
7 a b u Mr
%o A � 9 ° NI
s m
• j.� m c4p F ( $ s z
Z ROP06D • g �: o �'
$ y z + •o p IV161& LI Y •.
jm� E - v
/t/ y 7O ~ ; 3000,7 t ° 100. w
Y �•--- eolal � O
+ E � N ' 10•[ �}.4ly,r •�4+ � R. P.QILKRI.1r? r N
`�Eqs fir. • O
b 1 T ZE. �I N �` V o\
5A33
BITUMNOUS O V V w --4
D , IQi T-
40.00
R J[I
O
D5 .001sb
r � r A • �� I
It p
N8~ O rAU k
14.70 A
s
o r Y k Y !i 14.70
° ♦ 1.71 04904A G r u.26
Il b AAA 24.45 24.43
L.52 a ( m
) Z
� s � s
+ % <
RIP r ANP r
g 40.00 i 4 p R
N 072 . _^_•___ �•i •`. - ' _ � / 7m
3 8 Ia6
%OIND IRON
1 q q
TARY r STEEL OAS CONCOMTE 3144 1�0•LwTARY rOR«WW sNOtMr31RM«
v a r r w r s w r r r r r • r r r • r r r—
y E L • •
r • —
• MY FORCE
Y mO 2TV �• SNTM•Y—Y—K�R o.41f R ow ROAD
4 0'_ . • F•—+•Crue�l
—
U.P.RATER
1 ITT 1 11 r p t N ,mil N 1 pl
Q•• +S �r � LUy�EROpanp TttlPr10NC CA&I LIS•R.C .SIpfW EEwp1 0.4011 nOr
Date: 7 /S Fee: $130.00
CITY OF ST: ANTHONY
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Applicant: 57�,�,rFlo,v� /� e� ��..,�E� Phone: 7S8-967�
Address: 3700 Fos- plis
Status of applicant (owner, buyer, renter, agent, etc.):_ Ow..j 60_
Street address and/or legal description of property in question:
-3'7Oo floss P-A - 73.J 30 23 g4078 3 2eako
Zoning district in which property is located: A`
Conditional use proposed: AJVRs>•jg-. t-fo yeE AA)/A Ass tsTP-A Ll v/.4 C'
A-P PP--r m e.,.,`rs X xP64.,1s 1o.J
Minnesota Statutes and City Ordinances require that the following conditions be satisfied
before a conditional use may be authorized. Please respond to these conditions, using
additional sheets, if necessary.
1) The proposed conditional use is one of the conditional uses specifically listed for the
zoning district in which it,is to be located.
P E2/n TT Zb VS F
2) The proposed conditional use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general
welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property values or
improvements in the vicinity.
STANT140"y 4--AL-YO eENiF,e 14AS PPV_Rr4TE4 Frog 29 YEAJZS A*r THIS Loci4Tro.j
CADS/.�( ND ktAR.,r, To LOCAL RF_SiAF_r -rs op- VA1_UE5
NOT BV ov2 a vs ass IS
3) The proposed conditional use is necessary or desirable at the above location to
provide a service or a facility which is in the interest of public convenience and will
contribute to the general welfare of the neighborhood or community. T14 15 PFXSSCT WAS,
(ZA.avciE.h #f. gy S11gTE OF 1'101I-+,JE50na AS fJbcF-S5AP-/_
Signature of applicant: /2
07 5 9 66 * 130 . 001A
Fee: /00.00
(R-1............$ 60.00
Other.........$100.00)
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
Petition for Variance
Applicant: ST A.j T HoN0E 14 EA L--rN C1=_..rrzA, _
Address: 3900 mss Ph Phone: 78"e-q&-23
Status of applicant (owner, buyer, renter, agent, etc.): o�v,�E2 - R�M .�isr�aTdR
Street address and/or legal description of property petitioned for variance:
3700 doss P.0 /3=U 31 30 ?_3 44 00-29 3 ?, S2 k
Zoning district in which property is"located: -�F
Request: 1.5 FvoT sETBaack FoP- PAa.kl-G SEES 2n
a,d eAA--JoLZ2 �Q
Minnesota Statutes and City Ordinances require that the following conditions must be
satisfied for approval of this request. Please respond to these conditions using additional
sheets, if necessary.
1. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the parcel of land involved, the proposed variance would relieve an
undue hardship, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, should the
applicable ordinance be strictly enforced.
2. The purpose of the proposed variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to
increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but would correct
extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other
property in the vicinity or zoning district.
3. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by City Ordinance and has not been
created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel of land.
Signature of Applicant
0.7-=1.3 9-6-A.-- *10 0 0 0 0 CA
Fee:—/ �
(R-1............$ 60.00
Other.........$100.00)
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
Petition for Variance
Applicant: larA o'1-0o•Jy Aa- eE,_v-r&�
Address: �;7o o Foss P-A Phone:
Status of applicant (owner, buyer, renter, agent, etc.): ow..j &P- - .4b 1k,•-i r��e
Street address and/or legal description of property petitioned for variance:
�78-a PoSS RA -3/ 30 Z3 4 SFo 79 2-,C2
Zoning district in which property is'located: R-
Sra E
Request: aFift Y ArRd O
Minnesota Statutes and City Ordinances require that the following conditions must be
satisfied for approval of this request. Please respond to these conditions using additional
sheets, if necessary.
1. Because* of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the parcel of land involved, the proposed variance would relieve an
undue hardship, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, should the
applicable ordinance be strictly enforced.
2. The purpose of the proposed variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to
increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but would correct
extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but'not applicable to other
property in the vicinity or zoning district.
3. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by City Ordinance and has not been
created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel of land.
Sig ature of Applicant
07=95='96p *10000016
Fee:
(R-1............$ 60.00
Other.........$100.00)
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
Petition for Variance
Applicant: ST l4�rHoN� //� -�-+-r C'�•.�;�2
Address: �370 D Po s s It Phone: 7 S S -26 -23
Status of applicant (owner, buyer, renter, agent, etc.): ow-j EP- -ADS, •.u�sr,�
Street address and/or legal description of property petitioned for variance:
?')D p PO S-5 P-6 3 / -30 2 3 4 40.78 r3 2 82 IP
Zoning district in which property is located:
Request: 2EP_ Y Aa- s E-r 9AcK /5 4ee-r
Minnesota Statutes and City Ordinances require that the following conditions must be
satisfied for approval of this request. Please respond to these-conditions using additional
sheets, if necessary.
1. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the parcel of land involved, the proposed variance would relieve an
undue hardship, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, should the
applicable ordinance be strictly enforced.
2. The purpose of the proposed variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to
increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but would correct
extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but-not"applicable to other
property"in the vicinity or zoning district.
3. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by-City Ordinance and has not been
created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel of land.
Signature of'Applicant
07 = 15"=96X * 100 . 00a
Fee: 8 .
(R-1.............$ 60.00
Other.........$100.00)
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
Petition for Variance
Applicant: ST A,-j rKoNy 64-A LY- 4 CS,,,,*-te
Address: 3700 Pons RZ Phone: 78 9-2673
Status of applicant (owner, buyer, renter, agent, etc.): oyv,u ee -Ao•„•.��sr�•4ra+e
Street address and/or legal description of property petitioned for variance:
37oo boss P-A 3 I 30 z 3 SLCF a a z gap
Zoning district in which property is located:
Request: Zo 7` Covr_-P_AtoE 9P A-PPo k• S&17v
Minnesota Statutes and City Ordinances require that the following conditions must be
satisfied for approval of.this request. Please respond to these conditions using additional
sheets, if necessary.
1. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical
conditions of the parcel of land involved, the proposed variance would relieve an
undue hardship, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, should the
applicable ordinance be strictly enforced.
2. The purpose of the proposed variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to
increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land, but would correct
extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property but not applicable to other
property in the vicinity or zoning district.
3. The alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by City Ordinance and has not been
created by any persons presently having an'interest in the parcel of land.
Signature of Applicant
07 =,1.5=96A, * 100 . 00"
07/17/96 12:42 ST.RNTHONY H.C. -► 612 781 9323 P02
ST . ANTHONY HEALTH CENTER
Quality Care in a Homelike Environment
3700 FOSS .ROAD NE • ST. ANTHONY, MN 53421 • PHONS (612) 788-9673 • FAX 788-0104
July 16, 1996
Dear Neighbor:
What: You are invited to an informal community meeting
Place: Chandler Place Retirement Apartments
3701 Chandler Drive
St. Anthony, MN 53421
Community Room - Lower Level
Time: 6:30 - 7:30 PM
Date: Wednesday July 24, 1996
Why: St. Anthony Health Center is proposing an expansion covering approximately
16,000 square feet and relocating of parking.
As a neighbor.of ours, I would like to share with you our site plan and proposed
expansion plans. Your input and suggestions are welcome as Vve now have an
opportunity to make revisions. Due to the nature of our expansion, It is also
necessary to pursue a few variances with the City of St. Anthony. You will soon
be advised by the City in their official notice. This is your opportunity to
p-review our plans.
Should you not be able to attend, you may contact me at 788-9673 to•privately
review our plans.
Sincerely,
Michael R Miller
Administrator
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
VARIANCE PETITIONS
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Notice is hereby given that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing
on Tuesday, August 20, 1996, at 7:05 P.M. or as soon thereafter as possible, in
the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road (enter northeast
comer) for the following purpose:
Applicant: Michael Miller - St. Anthony Health Care Center
Property Address: 3700 Foss Road
Proposal: 1) Conditional use permit to allow construction of
an addition to the St. Anthony Health Center. The
property is zoned R-4, Multi-family dwelling. The
Ordinance allows a nursing home as a permitted
conditional use in an R-4 district.
2) Parking in the setback - a 15 foot variance is
requested to allow parking in the setbacks on Foss
Road and Chandler Drive. The Ordinance requires
30 feet.
3) Lot coverage - a variance of 7,391.5 square feet
(6% of the total 115,969 square feet) is requested
or coverage of 65,376 square feet (56%). The
Ordinance permits up to a maximum of 57,984.5
square feet (50%) coverage.
4) Rear yard setback - setback variance request of
25 feet in the rear yard. The Ordinance requires 40
feet.
5) Side yard setback - a 7 foot variance is needed
on the southwest corner. The Ordinance requires a
15 foot setback for each side.
Anyone wishing to be heard with reference to the above matter will be heard at
said time and.place. Questions regarding this matter may be referred to the
Management Assistant 789=8881. Auxiliary aids are available upon request at
least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk at 789-8881 to make
arrangements.
Kim Moore-Sykes
Management Assistant
Publish: St. Anthony Bulletin
August 7, 1996
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I,
hereby certify that I placed the attached Notice of Hearing for
ji. 37C)
in the U.S. Mail on the below specified date.
Date:
Signature:
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
3 JULY 9, 1996
4 I. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL.
5 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor
6 Ranallo.
7 II. ROLL CALL.
8 Councilmembers Present: Ranallo, Enrooth, Wagner and Faust.
9 Also Present: City Manager Michael Mornson.
10 Councilmembers Absent: Marks.
11 III. APPROVAL OF JULY 9, 1996 COUNCIL AGENDA.
12 Motion by Enrooth, second by Wagner to approve the July 9, 1996 Council Agenda with the
13 following changes:
14 Under VI. Presentation of Claims add: D. Resident Comments Regarding Airplane Noise.
15 Motion carried unanimously.
16 IV. APPROVAL OF JUNE 25, 1996 COUNCIL MINUTES.
17 Motion by Faust, second by Wagner to approve the June 25, 1996 Council minutes as presented.
18 Motion carried unanimously.
19 V. LICENSES/PERMITS/PETITIONS.
20 Motion by Faust, second by Enrooth to approve the following licenses:
21 Heating License:
22 Maple Grove Heating& Air Conditioning, Osseo, MN/Renewal
23 Twin City Furnace Company, Inc., St. Paul, MN/Renewal
24 Minnegasco, Minneapolis, MN/Renewal
25 Market Mechanical, Inc., Plymouth, MN/Renewal
26 Preferred Mechanical Services,Inc., Richfield,MN/Renewal
27 E.L.K. Mechanical HVAC, Ramsey, MN/Renewal
28 Royalton Heating & Air Conditioning, Brooklyn Park, MN/Renewal
29
30 Temporary 3.2 Beer Park Permit:
31 Central Park, July 17, 1996, Firstar Bank/Company Picnic
32 Central Park, July 31, 1996, Renee Pint/Honeywell Picnic
33
34 Motion carried unanimously.
35 VI. PRESENTATION OF CLAIMS.
1 .f
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 9, 1996
Page 2
1 Motion by Wagner, second by Enrooth to approve the following claims:
2 A. Hennepin County Assessor in the amount of$28,510.16 for 1996 Contract Billing.
3 B. Barr Engineering iri the amount of$8,800.00 for professional services rendered during
4 the period of September 30, 1995 through May 31, 1996.
5 C. 4 pages of Verified Claims as presented by the Finance Director.
6 Motion carried unanimously.
7 D. Resident Comments Regarding Airplane Noise.
8 Mr. Anthony Kaczor, 3008-33rd Avenue, stated he was present this evening to bring it to
9 the City Council's attention that the noise of passing airplanes is increasing, especially on
10 the weekends. He expressed concern that if the proposed North/South runway is
11 constructed at the airport, the noise would increase even more.
12 Mayor Ranallo noted that the City does address the Airport Commission regarding noise.
13 He stated the noise is also more noticeable in the Summer months when people spend
14 more time outdoors.
15 Councilmember Faust noted the aircrafts are being required by the Noise Abatement Law
16 to be fitted with new Stage II engines by 1998, which will reduce the noise level.
17 Mayor Ranallo thanked Mr. Kaczor for attending the meeting and expressing his
18 concerns.
19
20 VII. REPORTS.
21
22 B. Councilmembers.
23 Councilmember Wagner reported his attendance at a meeting of the St. Anthony
24 Merchant Association. They are currently planning the Kiddie Carnival which is
25 scheduled for August 17, 1996. The library will hold a book sale in conjunction with this
26 event.
27 Councilmember Faust reported he will be attending the first meeting of the League of
28 Minnesota Cities Improving Fiscal's Future Policy Committee this Thursday. This
29 Committee will deal with taxes and how they affect cities.
30 Councilmember Enrooth reported Villagefest is proceeding well. There is still concern if
31 the necessary area will be cleared of construction materials in time. The parade is
32 expanding considerably this year and will include floats from many other communities.
33 Enrooth noted the St. Anthony/Spring Lake Park/Fridley/Columbia Heights Patriots Band
34 was the grand champion at Calgary this year. There was Council consensus to send a
35 letter to congratulate the band.
Ij
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 9, 1996
Page 3
1 A. Legislative Update.
2 Senator John Marty and Representative Mary Jo McGuire were present to give a
3 legislative update.
4 Representative McGuire stated it was good to hear from Mr. Kaczor and receive input
5 from the people directly involved. She reported a bill was passed this session which
6 included plans for a North/South runway. There are noise abatement dollars available to
7 mitigate some of the noise. There are also new engines available which are less noisy.
8 She stated she would pass Mr. Kaczor's comments on.
9 Representative McGuire reported she had served on the Judiciary Committee of the
10 Judiciary Finance Division working for crime prevention. She also chaired the Data
11 Privacy Committee.
12 Representative McGuire stated she was disappointed to report that the legislature had
13 been unable to pass much in the area of property tax reform but she is anxious to continue
14 working in that area.
15 Senator John Marty stated he has growing concerns with the difficulty of addressing
16 property tax reform. It is difficult to reach a consensus due to the fights between different
17 geographic areas and different types of property. Part of the concern is what items
18 property taxes are used to pay for. They are not used primarily to pay for local issues.
19 Senator Marty noted some of the issues in the upcoming session will include the use of
20 local government aid and the building of a new stadium. He noted the School Districts
21 are facing a reduction in funds next year and he felt some of these upcoming issues need
22 to be prioritized. He thanked the City Council and Staff for keeping in touch with
23 himself and Representative McGuire.
24 Councilmember Faust stated that as a Councilmember,tax payer, and assessor, he felt a
25 tax freeze was not the solution. The solution was tax reform. He asked if the suggestions
26 of Ann Rest were being supported by the Legislature.
27 Senator Marty stated he liked the Ann Rest proposal the best. It will remove education
28 funding from property taxes and derive other ways of calculating how local aid will be
29 distributed. Her plan is not ideal but is better than most of the others he has seen.
30 Representative McGuire commented that a tax freeze is not fair to local governments.
31 Unless there are good discussions on tax reform, she felt certain the tax freeze option
32 would resurface. The Legislature really needs to look at what is being paid for with each
33 tax.
34 Wagner asked if there had been discussion in regard to TIF funds.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 9, 1996
Page 4
1 Representative McGuire stated she did not believe Ann Rest would allow any expansion
2 of TIF funds. She reported she had attended a meeting this morning regarding growth in
3 the metropolitan area and transit. TIF has driven a lot of development and growth and the
4 Metropolitan Council would prefer to see growth driven by a plan rather than by TIF
5 funds.
6 Senator.Marty stated the Legislative Auditor issued a reported 3 to 4 months ago on TIF
7 financing. He stated there had been abuse of TIF funds but most had occurred prior to
8 1991.
9 Mayor Ranallo questioned how the lottery funds were utilized.
10 Representative McGuire stated 60%of lottery funds go to the general fund and 40%go to
11 the environmental fund. She asked Council how they felt the transit system was working
12 in the City of St. Anthony.
13 Mayor Ranallo stated he did not see a need for mass transit in St. Anthony but noted it
14 does pose difficulties for residents when a bus route is removed. Many residents rely on
15 the bus system for transportation.
16 Faust noted one problem is there is transportation available to your destination by bus but
17 often there is not bus service to return you home.
18 Mayor Ranallo noted there has been a lot of controversy over management of the bus
19 system. He also noted the park and ride centers are utilized quite heavily.
20 Senator Marty stated he is addressing the management issue. He also-noted it made more
21 sense to have an efficient bus service than to build more roads at incredible costs.
22 The Council thanked Senator Marty and Representative McGuire for their time and the
23 update.
24 C. May
25 Mayor Ranallo had no report.
26 D. Ci , Manager.
27 City Manager Mornson introduced the new Liquor Operations Manager, Mike Larson.
28 He will begin employment with the City of St. Antony on July 15, 1996. He previously
29 worked as the Liquor Operations Director for the City of Fridley. City Council
30 welcomed Mr. Larson.
31 Morrison introduced Shawn McAlpine,Director of the Salvation Army.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 9, 1996
Page 5
1 Shawn McAlpine, Director of the Salvation Army stated he was in attendance this
2 evening to inform the City of the upcoming 75th Diamond Anniversary Celebration
3 which will be held on September 15, 1996. The Salvation Army has been serving the
4 needs of children from the St. Paul and Minneapolis area at the Silver Lake Campground
5 since 1921. Mr. McAlpine invited City Councilmembers and citizens of St. Anthony to
6 attend the celebration which will include a pancake brunch from 12:00 to 2:00 P.M., at
7 which time they will be dedicating 2 donated facilities on the grounds. There will be
8 events from 2:30 to 6:30 P.M. including clowns, an animal show, musical performances,
9 childrens games, a puppet show, historical display of Silver Lake Camp, craft display,
10 self-guided tour of the grounds, and several unconfirmed events. The evening will
11 conclude with an ending campfire from 6:30 P.M. to 8:30 P.M. The Camp Committee
12 will be in contact with the City as plans progress to inform the City of the needs for this
13 event which may impact the*City of St. Anthony. They are attempting to secure off-site
14 parking and shuttle service to reduce the impact to traffic flows and may need assistance
15 in providing information to St. Anthony users of Silver Lake. He thanked the Council for
16 the opportunity to share this information and also for their efforts to keep Silver Lake a
17 recreational lake that can be shared and enjoyed together.
18 Mayor Ranallo suggested Mr. McAlpine contact Dr. Carr, of the Silver Lake
19 Homeowners Association.
20 Mr. McAlpine stated the Camp Committee has been in contact with the Lake Association
21 and they have offered to donate boats to facilitate tours of the lake.
22 Morrison asked what type of crowd the Committee was anticipating. Mr. McAlpine
23 stated they are expecting 500 people if the weather is bad and up to 2,000 is the weather
24 is good.
25 Faust asked how many children have attended the camp this season. Mr. McAlpine stated
26 the camp has served 470 campers this year.
27 Councilmembers thanked Mr. McAlpine and wished his success with the celebration.
28 Morrison noted Community Center updates. In the next 60 days, requests will be made
29 for proposals for furniture replacement for the administrative offices and police
30 department offices. Requests will also be made for phone and cabling. The Sports
31 Boosters did approve the $59,000.00 for the additional storage area.
32 Morrison reported the City is in the process of requesting proposals for a Comprehensive
33 Plan consultant.
34 Morrison noted development updates. The Arbors, Arnie Gregory's townhouse
35 development on Old Highway 8 may come before the Council with a revised plat to
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 9, 1996
Page 6
1 reduce the number of townhomes from 18 to 16. This would be done to accommodate
2 one level units. This will not reduce the City tax base. The revision should not require
3 any variances.-
4 Larry Beach has a purchase agreement for the Verkin property and will be proposing
5 seven townhouses. This will require a new plat and rezoning of the property.
6 Representatives of Chandler Place will be presenting a proposal to the Planning
7 Commission on August 20, 1996. The City has recommended, and they are intending to
8 hold a neighborhood meeting. The proposed addition will be 32,000 square feet and five
9 hearings will be required. All parking requirements of the ordinance are being met. They
10 will be 15 feet from the right-of-way on Chandler and 15 feet from the right-of-way on
11 Foss. The requirement is 30 feet. They will also require a rear yard setback variance of
12 25 feet and a side yard variance of 7 feet. Lot coverage will be 57% rather than the 50%
13 required in City Code, and nursing home expansion requires a conditional use permit.
14 They have received approval from the State and would like to begin construction this fall.
15 Mornson noted a change was made in the food operation at the Stonehouse at the last
16 City Council meeting. At that time, Ernie's Catering did not intend to be open on
17 Saturdays. He has since changed that and will be open from 5:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. on
18 Saturdays.
19 Mornson reported he is working with Mike Larson, Roger Larson, Bill Soth and St. Marie
20 Co. to secure lease space for the off-sale liquor facility. The intent is to move in when or
21 before CUB Food Stores open. Part of the agreement would include release from the
22 Apache lease which will save the City a substantial amount of money.
23 Mornson reported the tax increment bonds for CUB will be closing tomorrow. He
24 reported the 1997 budget is well underway. At this point, it appears spending will be
25 under 3%. As per Council's previous direction, Staff is hopeful to have no tax increase
26 for 1997. With respect to the current year,the City has spent 42%of the general
27 operating budget.
28
29 E. Discuss Replacement of the Bridges Over C.P. Rail System Track on Silver Lake Road
30 Just North of County Road D.
31 David Rholl,Ramsey County Design Engineer was present to discuss replacement of the
32 bridges over C.P. Rail System track on Silver Lake Road just North of County Road D.
33 He noted that the left turn lane of the southbound bridge is currently blocked off due to
34 repair of the concrete surface. Three years ago,the northbound bridge was closed for the
35 same reason. Both bridges are in poor condition.
36 Ramsey County has applied for federal funds and has received a grant to replace the
37 bridges in the year 2000 with hopes of advancing the funds to the year 1999. Minnesota
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 9, 1996
Page 7
1 statutes require City approval on any County State-Aid or Federal-Aid funded project
2 which is constructed within the boundaries of the City before proceeding into a
3 construction contract.
4 Mr. Rholl invited the City of St. Anthony to become involved with the project at a level
5 of their choice. A minimal involvement would be for the City to simply concur with and
6 approve of the County's proposed project. A medium or moderate level of involvement
7 of the City could include replacing utilities under the street in conjunction with the
8 project. An extreme level of City involvement could include decorative surfacing on
9 sidewalks and median surfaces, and landscaping.
10 Mr. Rholl stated there will be neighborhood meetings held to discuss the project with the
11 impacted residents and business owners. The primary goal of the project is to replace the
12 bridge. Some roadway immediately adjacent to the bridge will be tore up and replaced,
13 along with some curb, gutter and catch basins covers. It is likely the median island will
14 be removed and replaced with fresh concrete curb and gutter and concrete surface.
15 Enrooth asked the age of the bridge and if the bridge would be completely closed during
16 construction.
17 Mr. Rholl explained there are currently two separate bridges which will be replaced by
18 one bridge with longer turn lanes. One bridge will be maintained at all times to allow for
19 traffic flow. He noted the northbound bridge was built in the 1940s and the southbound
20 bridge was built in the early"1960s.
21 Faust questioned the time line for the project. Mr. Rholl explained Ramsey County is
22 presently consulting with TKDA and hopes to execute a contract within the next 3 to 4
23 weeks. The month after, they will begin to meet with involved parties and within one
24 year will have gathered all the information necessary to prepare a report and identify
25 specifically what they will do. A final plan will be accomplished within 18 to 24 months.
26 Faust stated he liked a three year plan, as it offers enough time but not so much time that
27 the historical perspective is lost.
28 Mornson asked how long construction would take and where the neighborhood meetings
29 would be held.
30 Mr. Rholl stated the project will take a full construction season with the final portions
31 being completed the following Spring. He is hopeful that the neighborhood meetings
32 could be held at Apache Plaza.
33 VIII. PUBLIC HEARING -None.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 9, 1996
Page 8
1 IX. NEW BUSINESS
2 A. Resolution 96-045,re: Receive Report and Order Plans for the 1997 Street Improvement
3 Project.
4 Bob Moberg, Rieke Carroll Muller was present to discuss the feasibility report for the
5 1997 Street Improvement Project.
6 Momson asked how the total street length and estimated assessment rate compared to
7 previous projects.
8 Mr. Moberg stated the total street length of the 1997 project is 2800 linear feet compared
9 to the 1995 project of between 4200 and 4300 linear feet. The estimated assessment rate
10 of the 1997 project is $41.99 per foot and the final rate for the 1995 project was $35.00
11 per foot. Mr. Moberg explained the reason the rate is higher is that virtually all the
12 properties on 35th Avenue N.E. are corner lots.
13 Morrison noted a tentative schedule for the 1997 project which had been distributed to the
14 Councilmembers. Tonight's approval is the last action for the City Council until after the
15 neighborhood meetings have been held.
16 Enrooth asked how the project would be completed. Mr. Moberg explained the whole
17 project has to be done at one time due to the underground work that needs to be
18 completed. He explained a short piece of watermain would be replaced on 35th Avenue
19 N.E. between Roosevelt Street and.Stinson Boulevard. The portion of the watermain
20 within the street reconstruction area on Edward Street will be replaced.
21 Motion by Wagner, second by Enrooth to approve Resolution 96-045, regarding
22 receiving report and order plans and specifications for the 1997 Street Improvement
23 Project.
24 Motion carried unanimously.
25 IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
26 A. Ordinance 1996-005, re: Conditional Uses 2nd Reading 1.
27 Motion by Enrooth, second by Faust to approve the 2nd reading of Ordinance 1996-005,
28 relating to permitted uses and permitted conditional uses in Rl, Single Family; RI A,
29 Single Family Lake Shore; and C, General Commercial districts in Chapter 16 of the
30 1993 St. Anthony Code of Ordinances.
31 Motion carried unanimously.
32 B. Ordinance 1996-004, re: Ordinance Reading! 3rd Reading).
33 Momson explained the verbiage of the Ordinance had been revised slightly by City
34 Attorney Soth.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 9, 1996
Page 9
1 •
2 Motion by Wagner, second by Enrooth to approve the 3rd reading and adopt Ordinance
3 1996-004,relating to ordinance readings, amending Section 200.06, Subd. 1 of the 1993
4 St. Anthony Code of Ordinances.
5 Motion carried unanimously.
6
7 NJ. ADJOURNMENT.
8 Motion by Enrooth, second by Ranallo to adjourn the meeting at 8:22 P.M.
9 Motion carried unanimously.
10 Respectfully submitted,
11 Lorri Kopischke
12 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial
13
14 Mayor
15 ATTEST:
16 City Clerk
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
3 JULY 23, 1996
4 I. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL.
5 . The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor
6 Ranallo.
7 H. ROLL CALL.
8 Councilmembers Present: Ranallo, Marks, Enrooth, Wagner and Faust.
9 Also Present: City Manager Michael Morrison.
10 Councilmembers Absent: None.
11 III. APPROVAL OF JULY 23, 1996 COUNCIL AGENDA.
12 City Manager Morrison advised of an additional request for a 3.2 license beer license and that
13 Howard and Doiene Krueger have withdrawn their zoning request.
14 Motion by Enrooth, second by Wagner,to approve the July 23, 1996 Council Agenda as revised.
15 Motion carried unanimously.
16 IV. APPROVAL OF JULY 9, 1996 COUNCIL MINUTES.
17 Motion by Wagner, second by Marks, to approve the July 9, 1996 Council minutes with the
18 following change:
19
20 Page 5, sixth line,revise to indicate: "after which time" instead of"at which time."
21 Motion carried unanimously.
22 V. LICENSES/PERMITS/PETITIONS.
23 Motion by Marks, second by Enrooth,to approve the following licenses:
24 Heating License:
. 25 Egan Mechanical Contractors, Inc., Minneapolis,MN/Renewal
26 Home Energy Center,Plymouth, MN/Renewal
27 Contractors License:
28 Dalco Roofing& Sheet Metal,Inc.,Plymouth,MN/re-roof at 2829 Anthony Lane S.
29 Motion carried unanimously.
30 Motion by Faust, seconded by Wagner,to approve the following licenses:
31 Temporary 3.2 Beer Park Permit:
32 Central Park,July 28, 1996, Roxanne Stark/Family Picnic
33 Jean Volna, August 9, 1996, Jean Volna/Honeywell Company Picnic
34 Central Park,August 24, 1996,Richard Pfeiffer/Fire Department
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 23, 1996
Page 2
1 2727 Stinson Boulevard, September 20, 1996, Kathy Radford/St. Charles Borromeo Fall
2 Cookout
3 Voting on the'Motion:
4 Aye: Enrooth, Faust,Wagner, and Ranallo.
5 Nay: Marks,
. 6 Motion carried.
7 VI. PRESENTATION OF CLAIMS.
8 Councilmember Marks inquired regarding the claim from Berger Transfer& Storage. City
9 Manager Mornson explained this company is hired for hauling. With regard to the $2,000
10 insurance claim payment to the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust, City Manager -
11 Mornson advised the City has been reimbursed for this cost from Falcon Heights.
-12 Motion by Marks, second by Enrooth,to approve the following claims:
13 A. League of Minnesota Cities Trust in the amount of$2,000.00 for settling an insurance
14 claim.
15 B.- Dorsey & Whitney in the amount of$950.71 for legal services rendered through May 31,
16 1996.
17 C. Foster, 0-file. Wenzell & Brever in the amount of$2,600.00 for legal services for June,
18 1996.
19 D. 4 pages of Verified Claims as presented by the Finance Director.
20 Motion carried unanimously.
21 VII. REPORTS.
22 A. Planning_Commission- July 16, 1996.
23 1. Howard& Dorene Krueger, 3631 Harding Street Rezoning Request
24 This item was withdrawn at the request of the applicant.
25 2. C. William& Susan Lutterman, 3433 Croft Drive. Rear Yard Setback Variance
26 Request.
27 Planning Commissioner Horst was in attendance to present this case. He reported the
28 Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 16, 1996,to consider the 18-foot rear
29 yard setback variance request of Howard and Dorene Krueger which is being made so
30 they can build a porch and deck on the back side of their house. The Planning
31 Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the 18-foot rear yard setback
32 variance for C. William and Susan Lutterman, as presented,based on meeting the three
33 criteria for variances, the neighbors voiced no concern,and contingent upon completion
34 of a certificate of survey and completion of the porch and deck within 12 months as
35 stipulated in the City Zoning Ordinance.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 23, 1996
Page 3
1 Councilmember Marks asked how the Planning Commission determined a hardship
2 exists. Planning Commissioner Horst stated a hardship was determined since it is
3 impossible to improve the property in any other way to make it useable due to the
4 unusual configuration of this comer lot. Also; the house was existing when they
5 purchased it and the corner lot involves larger setbacks for both the side and front yard.
6 Planning Commissioner Horst explained that locating the porch and deck on the other
7 side places it too close to the neighbor's property and is not feasible.
8 Councilmember Faust asked if the physical layout of the interior of the house is also a
9 consideration. Planning Commissioner Horst stated it is and noted that layouts of the
10 interior have been submitted for review. Plus,the neighbors did not express objection.
11 Councilmember Faust asked if there had been any questions about the intent to place
12 windows on the end wall or if.it will remain a closed wall (without windows). Planning
13 Commissioner Horst advised the intent is for the wall to have no windows, as a privacy
14 issue.
15 C. Wiliam Lutterman,petitioner, advised that when he purchased the house, it was not in
16 compliance since it was three inches off to begin with. He explained he is asking for a
17 :variance to construct a 3-season porch. In checking with all neighbors and discussing the
18 building plan,he found all were in favor since it does not encroach on the neighbor's
19 .property. Mr. Lutterman advised he has uncovered the survey irons to assure accuracy of
20 the setbacks. He is proposing a solid rear wall without windows to assure privacy
21 towards the neighboring property and assured the Council that if windows are installed,
22 they will be high enough to provide privacy.
23 Mayor Ranallo agreed that this lot is of an unusual configuration.
24 Motion by Enrooth, seconded by Marks,to approve the 18-foot rear yard variance request
25 for C. William and Susan Lutterman, as presented,based on meeting the-three criteria for
26 variances and that the neighbors voiced no concern, and contingent upon completion of a
27 certificate of survey and completion of the porch and deck within 12 months as stipulated
28 in the City Zoning Ordinance.
29 Motion carried unanimously.
30 3: Concept Review of Proposed Attached Garage Addition-Mr. ,
and Mrs. Bill Hedberg
31 2509 30th Avenue N.E.
32 Commissioner Horst advised the Planning Commission also considered a concept garage
33 review for Mr. and Mrs. Bill Hedberg and recommended the applicant follow the building
34 permit process since no variance is required. City Manager Morrison clarified that the
35 application will have to be considered by the Planning Commission since it involves an
36 building attached to the principle structure and not detached;the applicant will make
37 application to the Planning Commission.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 23, 1996
Page 4
1 B. Councilmembers. :
2 Wagner commented on the success of the Sister City reception.,
3 Faust commented on a profound statement made by Telle Lassooy-Saura that she is "not
4 just reaching out and opening.doors to houses but to hearts". He stated this places
5 credence on the Sister City program.
6 Faust reported on his attendance at the recent meeting of the League of Minnesota Cities
7 Improving Fiscal's Future Policy Committee and distributed a list of items which will be
8 submitted to the LMC as priorities to present to the legislature during the next session.
9 He announced their next meeting is August 8, 1996, and requested the Council's input
10 prior to that date. Faust also commented on the AnnRest property tax reform proposal
11 which he will provide to staff.
12 Enrooth reported the Villagefest Committee met again last night to discuss activities for
13 the upcoming Villagefest which will be held on August 3, 1996. He stated he believes
14 things are on track, progressing nicely, and if the weather is nice,they anticipate a gala
. 15 affair.
16 Marks extended his appreciation to City staff, Connie Kroeplin and Kim Moore-Sykes,
17 and the Mayor and Council for their help with the Sister City reception. He informed
18 regarding other activities they are considering such as inviting a musical band from Salo,
19 having a Sister City meeting with Salo members and,perhaps,joint Chamber of
20 Commerce interaction.
21 Marks stated he has been researching other community's services, library facilities,water
22 quality, and city halls. He stated he has noted the most prevalent garbage on streets and
23 parking lots is cigarettes and asked what happens when someone litters. City Manager
24 Mornson advised St. Anthony has a littering ordinance but it is really a priority issue.
25 Marks requested staff research what type of enforcement activity can be taken.
26 Mayo r
27 Mayor Ranallo noted the recent newsletter article advising wells must be sealed, grouted,
28 and capped. He reported he received several calls saying the article is in error because if
29 the well is being-used, it does not need to be grouted. He requested staff research and
30 clarify this issue.
31 Mayor Ranallo reported that he and the Councilmember Enrooth met with the Acting
32 MPCA Commissioner to express the City's position on the Schnitzer Environmental Case
33 and advise them of the low battery volume handled by the City of St. Anthony.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
July 23, 1996
Page 5
1 Mayor Ranallo stated he attended the previous Villagefest meeting and found the
2 members to be very energetic. He noted that while there is no chairperson for next year,
3 all of the committees have already been established. He inquired regarding the clean-up
4 aspect after the Villagefest events. Enrooth stated this is being worked on. Enrooth
5 reviewed the floats that are anticipated at the parade. Wagner added that the Kiwanis will
6 ride on the fire truck and hand out peanuts.
7 1. Proclaim National Night Out
8 Mayor Ranallo reviewed the Proclamation declaring August 6, 1996, as National Night
9 Out. He reported that, so far, only one house has registered for participation but he hopes
10 more will register.
11 Motion by Marks, second by Wagner,to proclaim August 6, 1996, as National Night Out
12 in the City of St. Anthony.
13 Motion carried unanimously.
14 D. Ci , Manager.
15 City Manager Morrison advised the City is in the process of receiving proposals for the
16 comprehensive plan update and has interviewed three to four firms who were fact finding.
17 He explained that a public hearing is required but,perhaps, the consultant could conduct a
18 community survey to determine issues.
19 City Manager Morrison reminded the Council of the CUB ground breaking ceremony
20 scheduled for August 1, 1996. He advised the Public Works employees will put out tables
21 and chairs and create a stage area. Also,the closing transaction is completed, the
22 development agreement recorded, and the project is on schedule. City Manager Morrison
23 noted he will need to obtain permission from the property owner for the ground breaking
24 ceremony since it is proposed to be held on private property.
25 Mayor Ranallo noted the CUB ground breaking program will start at 5 p.m. with
26 Councilmembers, Firstbank, and CUB representatives being introduced and making short
27 speeches. He asked Councilmembers to submit their suggestions. City Manager
28 Morrison advised that a story will be included in the paper next week. Faust commented
29 on the importance of including photographs in such an article. City Manager Morrison
30 agreed and stated a photo will be included.
31 City Manager Morrison advised the Apache Wells auction is completed and the City
32 received$11,200 for items no longer needed.
33 City Manager Morrison reported the Stonehouse parking lot will be delayed until next
34 year because of the expense for the new cash registers($35,000 to $40,000)but Public
35 Works will fix the alleys and patch and stripe the lot before fall.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
'July 23, 1996
Page,6
1 City Manager Mornson advised that the school is now on the Internet and will put basic
2 information regarding St. Anthony on the Internet at no cost to the City. The school will
3 include a message that the City of St. Anthony and the School District are cooperating
4 together on world-wide web technology on their school calendar.' City Manager Mornson
5 stated City staff will talk with their technology coordinator about what types of
6 information they would place on the web. Marks suggested including information on
7 meetings, phone numbers, and emergency references.
8 VIII. PUBLIC HEARING -None.
9 IX. NEW BUSINESS
10 A. Consider Election Judge List for September 10 1996 Primary Election
11 Motion by Marks, seconded by Enrooth,to approve the election judge list for the
12 September 10, 1996 primary election, as presented.
13 Motion carried unanimously.
14 IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
15 A. Ordinance 1996-005, re: Conditional Uses (Third Reading,2
16 Marks noted that in Section 5, Sub. 2, churches will be deleted. He reviewed there had
17 been some previous discussion about this and reported on an Anchorage,Alaska,
18 shopping center that contained a church and how their activities were a substantial part of
19 that shopping center.
20 Motion by Faust, second by Enrooth,to approve the 3rd reading and adopt Ordinance
21 1996-005, relating to permitted uses and permitted conditional uses in.Rl, Single Family;
22 R1A,,Single Family Lake Shore; and C, General Commercial Districts in Chapter 16 of
23 the 1993 St. Anthony Code of Ordinances.
24 Motion carried unanimously.
25 M. ADJOURNMENT.
26 Motion by Marks, second by Wagner,to adjourn the meeting at 7:37 P.M.
27 Motion carried unanimously.
28 Respectfully submitted,
29 Carla Wirth
30 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial
31
32 Mayor
33 ATTEST:
34 City Clerk
F.
992 99:
A 469.023 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT '
t ' to
federal law applicable to federal financial assistance for the project.If it is found upon
investigation that the net income of any families have increased beyond the maximum sh
income limits fixed pursuant to section 469.022 for continued occupancy in the hous-
' ing, those families shall be required to move from the project.
h. 46
i History: 1987 c 291 s 23
�i. 1. 469.024 POWER OF AUTHORITY. a
r;
P; Nothing contained in sections 469.016 to 469.024 shall be construed as limiting thf
the power of an authority(1)with respect to a housing project to vest in an obligee the nie
' right,in the event of a default by the authority,to take possession or cause the appoint- pr(
ment of receiver of the project, free from the r
a estrictions imposed by this section or inl
section a receiver
3;or(2)with respect to a redevelopment project,in the event of a default aft
by a purchaser or lessee of land, to acquire property and operate it free from such on
restrictions. pr(
x c:
History: 1987 c 291 s 24
469.025 DEMOLITION OF UNSAFE OR UNSANITARY BUILDINGS. wit
No project for low-rent housing or the clearance of a blighted area involving the
construction of new dwellings shall be undertaken by a housing authority unless,subse- ma ma
quent to the initiation of the project, there has been or will be elimination by demoli-
7 tion, condemnation, and effective closing, or compulsory repair; of unsafe or
unsanitary buildings situated in the area of operation substantially equal in number to loc
;i the number of dwelling units provided by the project. The elimination may, upon
approval by the commissioner of trade and economic development, be deferred for a res
period determined by the commissioner if the shortage of decent,safe,or sanitary hous- wit
;i ing available to families of low income is so acute as to force dangerous overcrowding boc
of those families. are
History: 1987 c 291 s 25; 1987 c 312 art 1 s 26 subd 2
me
hay
t 469.026 EXISTING BUILDINGS; ACQUISITION, REPAIR. mi
An authority may purchase,lease,or otherwise acquire existing buildings for reha- det
bilitation into low-rent housing.The provisions of sections 469.001 to 469.047 relating ern to other low-rent housing projects shall apply to the projects. Before proceeding
with for
i �W the project, an authority shall make an analysis demonstrating:
(1) the buildings to be acquired or leased shall be in such condition that it is feasi- or i
ble to remodel, repair,or reconstruct them and that the buildings,when rehabilitated, tue
will provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing;
(2) the rehabilitation of the buildings comprising the project will p'revent or arrest
the spread of blight so as to protect the neighborhood in which the buildings are located;
laic
111 and size
(3) the rehabilitated buildings will provide low-rent housing,will help to consery e
the existing housing supply, and will otherwise accomplish the purposes of sections deN
469.001 to 469.047. un1
Nothing in this section shall limit the powers of an authority with iespect to a rede- put
velopment project. pre
., tioc
_ History: 1987 c 291 s 26 to t
{1
469.027 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. car
Any person may submit a redevelopment plan to an authority,or an authority may
consider a redevelopment plan on its own in
transmit the plan to the planning agency of the city in which the area to be redeveloped itiative. An authority shall immediately ect
unc
rail
is situated, for its study, or, if no planning agency exists, the plan shall be submitted stre
to an agency indicated by the governing body of the city.An authority shall request the
_ y
written opinion of the planning or other agency on all redevelopment plans submitted Pie
;I
992 993 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 469.o2g
f it is found upon to it prior to approving those redevelopment plans, and the planning or other agency
nd the maximum shall submit its written opinion within 30 days. _
,ancy in the hous- History: 1987 c 291 s 27 =
469.028 MUNICIPAL GOVERNING BODY.
Subdivision 1.Findings,notice,determination.When an authority determines that
a redevelopment project should be undertaken,it shall apply to the governing body of
istrued as limiting ' the city in which the project is located for approval.The application shall be accompa-
;t in an obligee the nied by a redevelopment plan, a statement of the method proposed for financing the
cause-the appoint- �. project,and the written opinion of the planning agency,if there is one.Before approv
i by this section or ing any redevelopment plan, the governing body shall hold a public hearing thereon
e event of a default after published notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality at least
it free from,such once not less than ten days nor more than 30 days prior to the date of the hearing.
Subd. 2. Findings, notice, determination; governing body. The authority shall not
proceed with the project unless the governing body finds by resolution that: =
(1) the land in the project area would not be made available for redevelopment
LDINGS. without the financial aid to.be sought;
l area involving the (2) the redevelopment plans for the redevelopment areas in the locality will afford
zority unless;subse- maximum opportunity,consistent with the needs of the locality as a who_le,for the rede-
nination by demoli- velopment of the areas by private enterprise; and
;pair, of unsafe or (3) the redevelopment plan conforms to a general plan for the development of the
equal in number to locality as a whole.
iiination may, upon The governing body shall within 30 days after submission of the application, or
nt,be deferred fora resubmission as hereinafter provided,give written notice to the authority of its decision
3fe,or sanitary hous- with respect to the project. When an authority has determined the location of a pro-
serous overcrowding posed redevelopment project, it may, without awaiting the approval of the governing
body,proceed,by option or otherwise,to obtain control of the real property within the.
area,but it shall not,without the prior approval by the governing body of the redevelop-
ment plan,unconditionally obligate itself to purchase any such property.A plan which
has not been approved by the governing body when submitted to it may be again sub-
mitted to it with the modifications necessary to meet its objections.Once approved,the
ng buildings for relating determination of the authority to undertake the project and the resolution of the gov-
)1 to proceeding relating erring body shall be conclusive, in any condemnation proceeding, of the public need
;fore proceeding with for the project.
Subd. 3.Acquisition of open land.A redevelopment project may include any work
edition that it is feasi, or undertaking to acquire open or undeveloped land determined to be blighted by vir-
tue of the following conditions:
t will prevent or arrest (1) unusual and difficult physical characteristics of the ground;
buildings are located; (2) the existence of faulty planning characterized by the subdivision or sale of lots
laid out in disregard of the contours or of irregular form and shape or of inadequate
size;or
will help to conserve (3) a combination of these or other conditions which have prevented normal
e purposes of sections development of the land b
P y private enterprise and have resulted in a stagnant and
unproductive condition of land potentially useful and valuable for contributing to the.
r with respect to a rede- public health, safety, and welfare. Acquisition of such land shall be a redevelopment
Project only if a redevelopment plan has been adopted which provides for the elimina-
tion of these conditions,thereby making the land useful and valuable for contributing
to the public health,safety,and welfare and the acquisition of the land is necessary to
carry out the redevelopment plan.
'.ty,or an authority may : . Subd. 4.Acquisition of unused or inappropriately used land.A redevelopment proj-
rity shall immediately - ect may include any work or undertaking to acquire land or space that is vacant,
r area to be redeveloped. unused,underused or inappropriately used,including infrequently used rail yards and
plan shall be submitted rail storage facilities, and excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; air rights over
lthority shall request the;, streets, expressways, railroads, waterways, and similar locations; land which is occu-
)pment plans submitted _¢- Pied by functionally obsolete nonresidential buildings, or is used for low utility pur-