Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 04221986 Meeting Sheet 101745 :Box: 2T , Folder •CC MINUTESAND'AGENDAS 1986 - All s. . Document:'CC-MINU.YTES,0.422198.6 1 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY COUNCIL MINUTES April 22, 1986 The meeting was opened at 7:30 P.M. with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Mayor Sundland. Present for roll call : Marks, Ranallo, Sundland, Enrooth, and Makowske. Also present: David Childs, City Manager; and William Soth, City Attorney. . Motion by Councilmember Marks and seconded by Councilmember Makowske to approve as submitted the minutes of the Council meeting held April 8, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of the licenses was deferred until the end of the meeting at the request of Mr. Childs. Motion by Councilmember Marks and seconded by Councilmember Enrooth to approve pay- ment of all verified claims listed for March 31 and April 22, 1986, in the April 22nd Council agenda packet. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Councilmember Makowske and seconded by Councilmember Marks to approve payment of $1 ,000 to BWBR Architects for preparation of site plans and cost estimates for the Stonehouse off-sale renovation. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Councilmember Marks and seconded by Councilmember Makowske to approve payment of $800 to Dorsey &,,Whitney for legal services during February, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Councilmember Enrooth and seconded by Councilmember Marks to approve payment of $1 ,825 to the Edward J. Hance law firm for prosecution services from March 6 through April 2, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. Ron Hansen was present to report the recommendations the Planning Commission had made to the Council during their April 15th meeting, as reflected in the copy of the minutes included in the Council agenda packet. During the discussion of the Commission's unanimous recommendation of approval of the requested lot split and variances necessary to develop two residential lots on the 134 foot wide by 133.05 foot long parcel of land owned by Arvid and Eleanor Johnson at 4008 Fordham Drive, Councilmember Marks observed that there had been no reference in the Commission's findings to the hardship required to be demonstrated before the variances requested in conjunction with the subdivision could be granted. -2- Mr. Soth indicated he had also noticed the omission and perceived it might also be advisable to address the conditions under which the City Ordinance allowed a sub- division without platting. The Manager said he perceived the Commission had considered those conditions had been addressed when similar lot splits had been approved across the street which they considered to have set the precedents for similar treatment of this property. Mayor Sundland indicated he perceived the hardship in this case was �that there was not enough square footage left for the owner to be able to maximize the use of his property under the ordinance. Councilmember Marks wondered whether the changing of the lot size might not have to be handled through an ordinance change and Mr. Soth told him that would be a better way to do it if a whole area were involved, but his perception was that it would not be appropriate to amend the ordinance for only one lot. The question was raised whether there were other parcels in the area which had the potential for the same treatment and the Manager indicated the only remaining parcel on which this would be possible would be the property across Fordham Drive south of the ones McGinn had developed which he perceived, because of the better condition of the existing structures, would probably not happen for-;some time. Mr. Childs stated the conditions he perceived to be present with the request which could meet the ordinance definition of "hardship", namely, that the difficulty in developing the land .had not been self-imposed and had not resulted from something the owners had done; the difficulty had resulted in part from the unusual circumstances related to the lot size; imposing the ordinance would cause a hardship for the property • owners; and, finally, the sole purpose of the variance was not primarily to bring economic gain to the owners. Councilmember Marks said that, because this is the only 60 foot lot left to develop in that area, he could accept that fact as the basis for the "hardship" which had to be demonstrated since he perceived the only other option left the owners if their request is denied would be to use the land for a park. Commissioner Hansen said he also perceived the Commission had considered the hardship had been established when the City accepted similar lot splits across the street and the Commission representative indicated he was confident the rest of the Commissioners would have no problem with the findings stated by the Manager. Mr. Soth proposed wording for the findings related to the subdivision. Motion by Councilmember Ranallo and seconded by Councilmember Marks to approve the subdivision without platting of the 134 foot wide by 133.05 foot long parcel of land owned by Arvid and Eleanor Johnson at 4008 Fordham Drive N.E., described as Lot 4, Block 5, Mounds View Acres 2nd Addition, except the north 34.5 feet thereof lying east of the west 163.07 feet thereof, into two parcels, 60 feet by 133.05 feet and 74 feet by 133.05 feet, which would result in the newly created lot "A" being 7,983 square feet where 9,000 square feet is required by ordinance, on the condition that the new structure is constructed no closer than 10 feet from the north property line which would provide at least 14 feet between the two structures on Lots "A" and "B", and further granting width variances for both lots which would then be 74 feet and 60 feet wide, where 75 feet is required. In regard to the sub- division without platting, the Council finds that: • 1 . Compliance with the platting requirements of Section 330:61 would create an unnecessary hardship because of the nature of the subdivision; and _3_ 2. Failure .to require the filing of a plat does not interfere with the purposes • of Section, 330.61 . In approving .the necessary variances in conjunction with the subdivision, the Council finds, as did the Planning Commission, that: 1 . No calls either for or against the proposal had been.received by staff either prior to the April 15th Planning Commission.hearing or the Council consideration April 22nd. 2. Lots less than 60 feet wide already exist in the Village and in that particular . neighborhood, construction of at least eight lots with similar widths- had been allowed by the City, which the Commission and .Council both perceived. would bring the. proposed Lot "A" well within the mainstream of City lots. The Council finds further that: 1 . The three questions required by statute to be answered in the affirmative had been done so with this proposal , including the fact that, because only a 60 foot 'wide lot is available to the applicants in that area for this. development, a strict application of the ordinance would create a hardship for the owners 'who would be .lef t with an unbui'ldable parcel . Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Johnson said he concurred with the action taken by the Council . • Commissioner Hansen reported the Commission had unanimously approved the subdivision without platting of the-property at 2911 Rankin Road N.E., perceiving neighbor concerns raised during the hearing were mainly related to the upkeep of the property and the type of tenants who had lived in the house on the property which had since been demolished.. The Mayor commented that it was his understanding that when Robert and Beverly Stafford acquired the property, those problems had to a great extent been handled. The Commission representative reported the Staffords had agreed with the Commission and neighbor assessment that the driveway on the southernmost parcel , Lot 20, should be constructed away from.the Rankin turnaround. However, he added, .the way in which the property is finally -developed would govern that to some extent. Councilmember ,Makowske said she had -attended the hearingbecause her home is directly north of "the property in -question and she shared the concern: about the safety ,of having a driveway exiting too close to the turnaround. , However, the Councilmember indicated she and her husband were in agreement with the lot split which would enable homes to be buil..t' on the .site-and,- if the driveway is built as agreed to, foresaw no difficulties with the proposal.: Mr. and Mrs. Stafford were present but did not join in the discussion. Motion by Councilmember Marks and seconded by Councilmember Makowske to approve the subdivision without platting of the property at 2911 Rankin Road N.E., generally described as portions of Lots 19 and 20, Auditor's Subdivision #377, Hennepin • County, .as requested by Robert and Beverly Stafford, 3916 Penrod Lane, for the development of two residential lots, with the stipulation that, if the driveway for Lot 20 is built to exit off Rankin Road, as a safety measure, it should be constructed _ on the Lot 19 side of the property away from the Rankin turnaround. -4- In approving the lot split, the Council finds, as did the Planning Commission, that: 1 . The subdivision as proposed would result in two buildable lots which meet all City ordinance requirements related to size and setbacks; and 2. There were no objections expressed during the April 15th Commission hearing to the lot split per se, but only concerns about the previous property use which were considered by both the Commission and Council to be matters better settled with mutual agreements between the owners and their neighbors. The Council finds further that: 1 . Requirement of compliance with the subdivision requirements of Section 330.61 would create an unnecessary hardship because of the nature of subdivision; and 2. Failure to require the filing of a plat does not interfere with the purpose of Section 330.61 . Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Hansen indicated the Planning Commission had attached a number of conditions to their unanimous recommendation of approval of the variances required for META Partnership to develop the commercial facility proposed April 15th by the project architect, Jim Guttormson of Environmental Expressions, for the former Legion Club property at 2701 and 2709 Kenzie Terrace, as reported in the minutes of that hearing. • Mr. Guttormson indicated that since that evening he had reevaluated the site and, by changing the angle of some of the 42 parking spaces and landscaping he had originally proposed, had been able to pick up the six additional spaces necessary to bring the project into conformance with the number approved by the City in December. Councilmember Ranallo questioned whether the neighbors on the alley side of the project had been fully informed that the City intends "to turn their alley into a street to be used by persons who park their cars on the alley side of this project" . Mr. Childs said he perceived no legal requirement for such a notification because the City Ordinance requires no variances for parking on alleys and the only variances which are required for this project are for the front and side yard setbacks for parking in those areas and a height variance. The Manager and architect told Commissioner Enrooth that there would no doubt be traffic on the alley with this project as there had been with the Legion Club, especially with hours of operation all day rather than from noon on as had been true with the Legion. Commissioner Hansen said there had been a lot of discussion on that point during the hearing and that was why it had been suggested that parking on the alley be restricted to building employees use and the Commission had stipulated in their motion that traffic flow markings be used to direct other traffic onto Kenzie Terrace. Mr. Guttormson commented that he perceived the public traffic would necessarily be more front entrance oriented in any event. Mr. Childs told Councilmember Ranallo that even if the variances were denied and a • smaller building requiring no variances would be erected on that property, there would be no restrictions on alley parking. Mayor Sundland said he perceived signage could be utilized to effect traffic control and even the vehicles parked on the alley could be directed to exit off Kenzie Terrace. The architect indicated the P -5- landscaping he had proposed had also been designed to direct the influx and flow of traffic on the site. • Councilmember Marks said the prospective buyers of Kenzington condos had expressed a different type of concern about the project to him because those who were con- sidering second floor units facing this project questioned whether the building height would obliterate their view. Mr. Guttormson said the fact that the Kenzington reproduction on the model had not been produced to scale might have given the wrong impression as to the proposed structure's height as related to the condominium project. The architect also said he perceived the view of the existing Legion Club structure to be "much more appalling" than the residential structure type appearance the new building would have with its cedar shingles, etc. Councilmember Ranallo reiterated that he was still concerned that all the abutting neighbors including those who had bought into the Kenzington had not been made fully aware of what was happening on this site, especially the fact that what was once a normal residential alley would now become "a street which seventeen or more cars would be using every day". Mr. Childs responded by saying all the current residents living within 200 feet of the site had been notified last fall that the project would require a variance for total number of parking spaces and setbacks from what was present with the gas station. Councilmember Marks indicated he still perceived that those persons buying condominiums which face this building should be made aware that they might not be able to see as far as they might have assumed. Mayor Sundland commented he perceived that, based on the Council concerns, it • should become the responsibility of the property owners to do a little "public relations work" with the current and prospective neighbors to sell the advantages of the project to them rather than to get the City into an adversative position with a public hearing. — Councilmember Marks suggested one positive aspect the owners might want to exploit would be his own perception that no matter what kind of traffic was generated to the site by the proposed project, it would probably be better than what the neighbors had on some occasions experienced with the Legion Club in the past and the new roof would certainly look a lot better than the existing roof with air conditioners, etc. all over it. The Councilmember and Councilmember Makowske were in agreement that the building being proposed by the architect at this time was much nicer looking that what had originally been proposed for the project. Councilmembers Ranallo and Enrooth indicated they perceived it would be well worth waiting three weeks to give the owners the opportunity of meeting with the neighbors to address any concerns they might have. Motion by Councilmember Marks and seconded by Councilmember Enrooth to continue the consideration of the META Partnership proposal for the Legion property to the next Council meeting, May 13, 1986. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Hansen indicated the Planning Commission would have representation at that meeting. Councilmember Makowske told him that having attended the April 15th • Commission, she had come to appreciate even more, the excellent work that body is doing. J -6- Councilmember Ranallo reported receiving numerous residents complaints related to people operating businesses out of their homes resulting in traffic congestion in • their neighborhoods and homes around which there are from seven to nine vehicles, some inoperable, parked on the street and in the driveways. The Councilmember indicated he had worked with staff to resolve several of these cases but perceived that with the current ordinance which permits up to six non-related inhabitants in a residence, little could be done about the latter problem.. Mr. Childs said the City had been able to eliminate the non-operable vehicles but could do little or nothing about the vehicles the residents drove. Councilmember Ranallo said the situation was worsened because at some of these residences there are also boats and recreational vehicles parked on the properties over the winter. Councilmember Marks recalled that at the time the City Ordinance was rewritten in 1976, the prevailing legal opinion seemed to be that the figure of up to six un- related persons living in a residence was the most acceptable. The Councilmember .indicated he perceived the thinking on that point might have changed somewhat in the meantime but said he would be somewhat hesitant to recommend an ordinance review for fear the City might end up with having to allow more, rather than less inhabitants to a residence. Councilmember Enrooth said he believed the City should at least look at some way of dealing with the number of vehicles of all types which can be stored or parked in the residential districts. Councilmember Ranallo agreed that staff should look at the ordinance to see what could be done to resolve the problem, but added that he knew from personal experience with four adult drivers in his own family that might be very difficult, but at least concerned residents could be told the City was • making every restriction the 1dw z1-Towed. The Manager said with the increase in "extended families" moving into the Village there might be a problem with trying to restrict the number of inhabitants living in a residence. Mr. Soth indicated he perceived the only reference available to the City was how the situations related to the "health, safety, and public welfare" of the resi- dents and there are some previous cases which say "the public welfare includes aesthetics and zoning restrictions can be adopted which are based almost entirely on aesthetics". The attorney therefore said he thought there might be some support for further restrictions as long as the City doesn't go so far some court would be forced to intervene. Councilman Ranallo commented he perceived there could certainly be a case made for poor aesthetics with some of the properties around the City where parked vehicles have ruined the lawns or the front yards have been filled with asphalt. Mayor Sundland related his own personal experience of unsuccessfully trying to convince one of his neighbors to clean up his property. It was his recollection that both problems had been explored with the City Attorney many times in the past with no easy legal solution ever found. However, since Mr. Soth had indicated there might be legal grounds for restricting commercial businesses with six or seven workers involved, it might also be productive to take another look at the other problems as well . • Motion by Councilmember Marks and seconded by Councilmember Ranallo to refer the zoning concerns with staff recommendations to the Planning Commission sometime in the near future. Motion carried unanimously. -7- Councilmember Marks then gave a preview of actions taken by the St. Anthony • Chemical Abuse Information Committee towards reorganization with a goal of greater efficiency and effectiveness in getting the message about chemical abuse out to the public. He said the study committee on which he serves had recommended the establishment of a Board of Directors as the legal entity who would report back to his committee and the School Board and whose responsibility it would be to evaluate the whole Committee program and to provide representation on the subcommittees formed to run the various functions of the program. Councilmember Marks indicated that during the review of those programs, the question had been raised about the legal ramifications of having committee members referring those who might seek their aid to the appropriate agencies who might be able to help them. Mr. Soth indicated he perceived no legal problems with providing a referral service. The Councilmember concluded his report by reporting he had three meetings related to his service on the executive board of the Youth Service Bureau scheduled for that week and hoped to be able to report back to the Council on both committees at their next meeting. Several descriptions of cases the Fire Department had handled in March were clarified for the Council benefit before the department report for that month was ordered filed. The consensus of the Council appeared to be that the Fire Department 1985 Annual Report Chief Entner had provided each of them had been very informative, especially the graph the Chief had drawn to illustrate the preponderance of medical emergencies over fire runs last year. Councilmember Marks suggested Chief Entner should be commended for an excellent report. The Manager assured the Councilmembers that there were reserves in training at this time and said he knew there was usually a waiting list of potential reserves available to the Department. As there had been with previous reports from the City Prosecutor, there was a reiteration of the Council 's sense of frustration with the level of fines and sentences imposed by the Court as a result of plea bargaining for what were perceived to be very serious DWI violations reported in the Hance firm listing of matters conducted at Hennepin County Municipal' Court, April 2nd. Councilmember Makowske said it had been her observation when she sat through one of those court sessions that the judge's decision in many cases appeared to have been tempered by the defendant's ability to pay. Councilmember Marks said he had gotten a somewhat similar judicial perception of the same problem when he had talked to a Ramsey County judge after a recent RCLLG seminar because the judge had told him he personally felt limited on the fines he could impose on a defendant with no money. Mr. Childs indicated he believed the City prosecutors had taken a tougher stance than almost any other community in this regard. The effect "judge shopping" might have on the level of fines and sentences imposed was also explored before the Prosecutor's report was ordered filed as informational , as was the copy of the minutes of the April 9th meeting of the District #282 School Board, which also had been included in the agenda packet. Included in the items from the April 16th staff meeting notes which were discussed with the Manager at some length, was the reference to the type of injuries which seem to be "plaguing" the Public Works Department, on which Mr. Childs indicated, staff is working hard to curtail . He also indicated he perceived the type of employee assistance program being proposed by Health Fitness Consultants, which had been • reported on in the notes, would be very helpful towards solving some of the personnel problems staff hasn't quite known what to do about in the past and which would work well within the existing personnel policy. -8- The Mayor and all four Councilmembers indicated their full support for having the program initiated in the City, saying such support programs had been available to private industry employees for a long time. They also- agreed with the-Managers suggestion that because this was such a worthwhile program, which would annually cost the City about $750.00 C$16 per employee) , it should, if possible, be fitted into existing department budgets, and not delayed until the next budget consideration. Mr. Childs reported the "Newsletter" had gone out that day and had contained an error in reporting the number of units in the Walker on Kenzie Project. He then asked what time the Council wanted to start the work session scheduled April 29th to receive the report from the liquor operations study group and the Manager suggested that, since it was apparent a meeting with META and Arkell would be needed soon, that meeting with the developers, which would have to be designated as a "Special" Council meeting, could also be held the same evening. The Council decision was that the liquor operations discussion should be scheduled to be held at 7:00 P.M. and the meeting with the developers at 8:00 P,M. As a point of information, Mayor Sundland reported that, before he left after the Board of Review that evening, Mr. Hanscom had agreed to let those residents whose appeal of their classification or valuation had been referred to the Assessor's office, know by letter just what disposition had been made of their requests well in advance of the May 12th reconvening date. Motion by Councilmember Ranallo and seconded by Councilmember Enrooth to adopt the resolution which would fund the recycling/beautification program created by the Council during their March 25, 1986 meeting. RESOLUTION 86-019 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A FUND FOR THE RECYCLING AND BEAUTIFICATION PROGRAM Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Councilmember Ranallo and seconded by Mayor Sundland to designate Councilmembers Enrooth and Marks to meet with District #282 School Board in relation to the City's leasing offices in the Parkview building . Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Councilmember Marks and seconded by Councilmember Ranallo to approve the third reading and adopt the ordinance which amends the City zoning map to change the use of the Fisher property on the corner of Stinson Boulevard and 33rd Avenue N.E„ from "C ", Commercial District, to R-3, Townhouse Residence District, for the purpose of constructing townhomes on the site. ORDINANCE 1986-004 AN ORDINANCE 'AMENDING THE CITY ZONING MAP Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Childs reported he had been unable to locate the paperwork for the application for a temporary beer license for a softball tournament which was supposed to have been submitted that day, so nothing could be done in that regard that evening. However, the Manager said, the matter could be brought up during the special meeting April 29th, if needed. -9- Motion by Councilmember Ranallo and seconded by Councilmember Enrooth to grant the • licenses listed in the April 22, 1986 Council agenda with the exception of the request to sell flowers, as follows: Cigarette Country Club Market, Inc. Minneapolis Park Board CGross Golf Course)_ Smoking Section, Apache Plaza Clochie's Coffee House (Apache Medical Building) Amusement Devices C. G. Rein CApache Plaza) Contractors Standard Water Control Systems, Inc. Custom Pools Dav-Ko Home Improvement Marvin H. Anderson Construction Co. Beer Minneapolis Park Board (.Gross Golf Course) Service Station St. Anthony Standard, 2812-27th Avenue N.E. Motion carried unanimously. THe copy of the April 15th request from Dale Peterson, 2727 - 26th Avenue South, Minneapolis, to sell flowers from the Rapid Oil Change property on Mothers Day had been included in the agenda packet and it was noted that at least this vendor had requested permission where many others had just gone ahead with their sales from the right=of-ways without first contacting the City. Mr. Childs indicated the City Police made a strong effort to stop these illegal sales and the Manager said, the only reference to this type of sale he had found in the City Ordinance had been related to the sale of produce outside grocery stores, but it was his inclination not to start enterprises like the one requested on private property or . City right-of-ways. However, he said, there is "grey area" when it comes to one day sales by merchants in the southern shopping areas. Mayor Sundland indicated he perceived there might be a conflict with traffic at that particular corner, and Mr. Soth told him he perceived that type of activity might be prohibited in the ordinance from a safety standpoint because the sales might prove to be a distraction to motorists, but, if the restrictions are imposed on a case by case basis, it might be more difficult. However, the attorney advised, the Council could permit this sale on a trial basis in anticipation of an ordin- ance restriction without setting a precedent for future sales of the same kind. Motion by Councilmember Ranallo and seconded by Councilmember Marks to grant Dale Peterson permission to sell flowers from the Rapid Oil Change property on the 10- corner of,-.Sr1 V'er Lake Road anis 37th'.'Avenue N.E' Mother's Day.,: May 11 , ;1`986, as :Long as- that activity' is contai_,ned on the commercial- property and not on .the City;;