Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC MINUTES 01271987 Meeting Sheet 5 .- -_ ..... .101682 •. , .. ' - Box. 21 Folder:,CC•MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1987. D:ocutnent:'CC MINUTES 01271987 a _ C=TY OF S T _ ANTHONY COUN C= L M 2 NUTS S .�AN U ARY 27 , 3- 987 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, Makowske. (Marks only a minute late. ) Also present: David Childs, City Manager William Soth, City Attorney Larry Hamer, Public Works Director Lee Entner, Fire Chief JANUARY 13 , 1987 COUNCIL MINUTES Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Makowske to approve the above with the following changes: Page 6 , para. 3 : Motion vote should have indicated a "Nay" vote by Makowske. Page 8, para. 3 : Motion vote should have indicated "Abstention" by Ranallo. Page 11, para. 2: Substitute "Pacs" for "Pacts" in line 3. • Motion carried unanimously. CLAIMS Motion by Marks, seconded by Enrooth to approve payment of all the verified claims for City accounts payable listed for December 31 , 1986 and liquor accounts payable ( 2 ) listed for the same date in the January 27 , 1987 Council agenda packet. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Marks, seconded by Makowske to approve payment of $1,937 . 00 to the Edward J. Hance law firm for City prosecution services from December 4, 1986 to January 7, 1987 . Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Enrooth, seconded by Ranallo to approve payment of $216. 45 in 1987 membership dues to the Ramsey County League of Local Governments. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Marks to approve payment of $7 ,588 . 00 to the Northwest Suburban Youth Services for the City' s participation in those services in 1987 under the joint powers agreement as budgeted for is the coming year. Motion carried unanimously. _ 7 . -2- Motion by Makowske and seconded by Marks to approve payment of $1, 356. 00 to the Briggs and Morgan law firm for legal services rendered through December 31, 1986 in conjunction with the City law suit against the U.S. Army et al related to- St. Anthony' s water contamination problems. Motion carried unanimously. REPORTS JANUARY 20, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - COMMISSIONER GEORGE WAGNER Sign Variance Request for Additional Signage for Get It For Less Store Application: by Colite Industries, Inc. , 229 Parson Street, West Columbia, South Carolina; for either a 150 square foot or 72 square foot identification sign on the east side of their Get It For Less Store at Apache Plaza in addition to the existing 147 . 5 square feet ( 2 signs) the store has near its entrance on the south side of the building. • Proponents: Store Manager Peter Bues who provided no further input during the Council consideration. Opponents: none and no opposing calls reported by staff prior to either the January 20th Commission meeting or Council consideration, January 27th. Staff input: City Manager' s January 16th memorandum included in Council' s agenda packet reiterated that the Apache management has certain criteria for signage for the shopping center under which Dennis Cavanaugh had advised that the signage requested for Get It For Less would be appropriate; Mr. Childs said he would request a copy of the center' s sign regulations for the Council and the Planning Commission. Commission' s that the Council approve signage to match the recommendation: larger sign the store has at its south entrance as long as the smaller sign on the south side of the building is removed. Council Action Motion by Enrooth, seconded by Marks to grant Colite Industries, Inc. a • variance to the City Sign Ordinance which would allow them to mount another Get It For Less sign on the vacant southeast corner of Apache Y -3- Plaza Shopping Center. The said sign would be 116 square feet to match the existing sign the store has near its south entrance. In return, the smaller 31. 5 square foot sign on the south side would be taken down, leaving Get It For Less with two equal sized signs, one on each side of their corner location. In granting the necessary variances for this signage, the Council finds, as did the Planning Commission, that: * the new sign should not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the neighborhood or vil- lage since it would be mounted on a large empty expanse of shopping center wall; * a particular hardship to the applicant would result if the strict letter of the regulations are adhered to and the impression is given that the store is only operating on one side of the building, whereas, Get It For Less actually occupies a large portion of that particular corner of the center; * the conditions upon which this particular variance are based are unique in that the store only has one entrance on that corner even though there is traffic flow on both • sides; * no one spoke against the variance during either the January 20th Commission hearing or January 27th Council considera- tion and, in fact, there was testimony favoring the addi- tional signage during the January 20th hearing; and * the Apache management had assured staff the new signage fit into the criteria established for the center signage. Motion carried unanimously. Leslie Paper Co. , 2850 South Anthony Lane Ground Sign Request Application: for a 3 feet high by 10 feet wide, two sided ground sign to be mounted on an 8 inch concrete base and placed on a natural berm, approximately 3 feet high; that the sign be allowed in addition to, instead of , the existing 98 square foot "L" logo on the west side of the building -and a smaller 50 square foot "L" and 42 square foot company name on the north wall of the building. Proponents: the Leslie Paper representative arrived after the sign- age had been approved; • -4- the President of Garment Graphics located next to the paper company had supported granting the variance for the ground sign as well as the retention of the existing wall signage in a letter presented during the Commis- sion hearing and included in the Council agenda packet. Opponents: none and staff had indicated no calls had been received either for or against the variance prior to the January 20th hearing or January 27th Council consideration. Staff input: City Manager' s January 16th memorandum to the Commission. Commission' s to allow the requested ground sign as proposed, as well recommenda- as the larger "L" logo on the west side of the property. tion: However, in order that excessive signage on the build- ing should be avoided, the Commission recommended the Council require the removal of the signage on the north side of the building. Council Action Motion by Marks, seconded by Makowske to grant the necessary variances to the Sign Ordinance which would allow Leslie Paper Company to erect a ground sign with 60 square feet of sign surface, where the Ordinance only allows 36 square feet, to be sited as they propose on their property at 2830 South Anthony Lane. The said sign is to be installed as the applicants have proposed, of very substantial construction on a sodded berm. In addition, Leslie Paper will be allowed to retain the large "L" logo they have on the west wall of their building, but will be required to remove the smaller "L" and "Leslie Paper" lettering from the north wall. In granting these variances, the Council finds, as did the Planning Commission, that: * all three conditions required to be satisifed affirmatively before such variances can be granted have been met with this proposal; * no one spoke against the variances at the January 20th Com- mission hearing or during the January 27th Council considera- tion but, rather, a letter from the next door business, Garment Graphics, supported the paper company' s request. Motion carried unanimously. Preliminary Approval Given Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments Related to Residential Parking and Definition of Family Size • Commissioner Wagner summarized the January 20th Commission minutes as follows: -5- • - said the January 20th hearing had evoked both forceful pro and con opinions from the seven people who spoke to the issue; indicated four of those persons were in favor of changes while three were opposed to one or more of the amendments; - advised that an honest reflection of those statements as well as the Commissioners' comments had been reported in the minutes the Council had before them; reported the Planning Commission had recommended the Council adopt all 5 amendments which would restrict the number of unrelated persons living in a single family residence to 3 where the current Ordinance allowed 6; - restricted the number of vehicles parked in front yards to four parked on paving; and required unlicensed "junkers" to be removed from residential yards; added that, because the notice of the hearing which had gone out with the water bills had not reached the residents before • the hearing, the Commissioners were recommending the Council give some consideration to delaying action on the new amend- ments to allow more time for the changes to be publicized; however, acknowledged that the Council had been working on this new Ordinance since last April and proposed changes had been given front page coverage several times since then; but also noted that the hearing had brought out the fact that not all residents read the newspapers which carried the stories. Mayor' s response: - agreed it was unfortunate that the notice which would have alerted the citizenry to the hearing on the changes had not gone out as planned because of errors in the water bills which accompanied the Newsletter had to be corrected before they could be mailed; assured the Commissioner that the only action which the Council would take that' evening would be to instruct staff to prepare the ordinance in its final form and bring it back in two weeks for the first of three readings; • - said it would take from six to eight weeks before the Council would be adopting the ordinance amendments, and hopefully, in -6- the interim, the Council would have gotten more public input related to the changes. Two Residents Give Their Views Only two of the persons who had attended the January 20th Commission hearing reappeared to discuss the proposed changes. One wanted the Ordinance strengthened and the other only had strong feelings about one amendment. Proponent: James Reasoner, 3536 Edward Street N.E. said he thought the proposed ordinance would be "better than we have now, " ; - was concerned, however, that restricting the vehicles which could be parked in the front yards would, in fact, just move the "junkers" to the back yards which many residents consider to be extensions of their living rooms; - perceived most of his neighbors expected to see boats temporarily stored in back yards but not 157 ' Chevy' s or construction companies being run from those locations; • - suggested that for the Council to address these problems would further enhance the City Ordinance; - said he had personally had no experience with the pro- blems posed by too many unrelated persons living in one single family home, but - indicated he would like to see the different segments in the proposal dealt with separately so the ordinance it- self wouldn' t fail altogether if one portion should be rejected; - agreed to put his suggestions into writing so the Council could address each one of them specifically when the amendments are given their first reading. Opponent: - Jeff Lofgren, 3109 Stinson Boulevard N.E. - indicated he had no personal problem with the parking section but recognized how it could affect a family like the Kelly' s with so many cars in the family; - suggested that particular section might be rewritten to make allowances for large family parking because in most cases, family members would eventually grow up and • move away; -7- - indicated he could see where the City might want to restrict parking for unrelated members of the household; agreed that there is - a lot of "junk" parked in yards around the Village which should be removed; - reiterated that, if any of those vehicles were really collectibles, their owners would never leave them un- covered outdoors to rust; stated his problem was with the change which would restrict unrelated persons to three in a single family home; - indicated that to the best of his recollection, he had been told by both Councilmember Ranallo and Mr. Childs that he could "rent out his two extra bedrooms to as many as three persons" ; - reported he only had one roommate at this time but wanted to beable to rent the other bedroom to a couple if he needed the extra rent to meet his mortgage pay- ments on that $85,000 house; • - considered it unfair that a six member family would be allowed to have two boarders under the proposed amend- ments but agreed that having six unrelated persons living in a home as the ordinance now allows was just too many; - said he had called a number of cities to see how many they allowed and found the majority of them restricted unrelated persons to four which seemed to him to be more appropriate for St. Anthony; - contended the complaints which had caused the Council to want to change the ordinance had not really been about the number of people living in a home but had rather been about the number of cars in front that that gen- erated; acknowledged his parking a beer truck around the Vil- lage for five years had caused problems in the past; but said he had removed it when asked and was now paying $980 a year to store it and a large boat he owns; indicated he wouldn' t have a problem with an ordinance which allowed a homeowner to park a campe or large boat on the grass in the back yard; but -8- • - thought homeowners should be allowed enough time after the Ordinance is adopted to put in the pavement needed to accommodate the four cars which are allowed; - told the Council that if they decided to restrict parking on the side of homes or in the back yard, it would be no problem for him even with three roommates because he planned on putting a three car garage on the back of his property; however, indicated he wouldn' t want to pave the side until the garage is constructed; stated he recognized that, as a single homeowner, he was a minority, but still contended it would be just as fair for him to rent to three unrelated persons as it would be for a family to rent to two. . Mr. Lofgren then brought up the question of how long guests could park in a driveway by saying he had observed five cars parked in Councilmember Ranallo' s driveway and another on the street, the previous Sunday. He speculated that the City police "could pick and choose who they would ticket after four hours. " Mr. Lofgren indicated that with the restriction the City has on garage • size and the parking ban in the winter, some homeowners have begun to feel "trapped, " however, he added, that with a 30 year mortgage, he intended to stay in St. Anthony and would be "taking pride in his home' s appearance. " Council Response Sundland - reiterated that if the residents put their suggestions into writing, the Council would be better able to con- sider them at the same time they would be expressing their own likes and dislikes of the document Mr. Soth would be preparing for the next Council meeting; said he also perceived the problem the City could have with families with six or seven children where, theo- retically, there could be as many as nine cars parked in a front yard over a period of time; but wondered what response the City could make when those families complained about the hardship the new Ordin- ance imposed on them; told Mr. Lofgren the Supreme Court had ruled that a City had -the right to restrict the number of unrelated per- sons to only two in a single family residence; -9- • Makowske - told Mr. Lofgren she appreciated his suggesting the problem the City might have with corner lots as well as his suggestions for establishing a time period during which the police would not be tagging guests; - said one of the calls she had gotten after the Newsletter finally reached the residents had been from a man who had just moved to St. Anthony and was "delighted" the City was taking steps to correct pro- blems which had caused him to move from his last residence; said the new resident had told her he moved to St. Anthony because this City seemed to have a "different orientation. " - reiterated that she had received a call from a pro- spective City home buyer who said she had decided not to buy in St. Anthony because of the "junky" appear- ance of some of its residential areas; - indicated the problem the Council is trying to avoid is having four young people renting a house and subletting to four of their contemporaries, resulting • in noisy parties, cars parked all over the yard, and lots of complaints from the neighborhood; - cited just such an incident which occured on Rankin Road where the owners had moved away and rented to young people while they were trying to sell the house. Marks - agreed there are a number of locations around the Vil- lage where junk cars are parked on lawns and the neighbors "are up in arms about the appearance of their neighborhood" ; explained that long-time problems had led the Council to attempt to write an Ordinance which addressed the type of problem which can' t be addressed under the current Ordinance; - indicated that talking to residents after the News- letter had gone out had made him aware of the problems the parking amendment might create for families whose kids need transportation and often can' t afford cars that are the best when it comes to appearance; pointed out that the City can' t require homeowners who built their homes before the current Ordinance required double garages to now put in two car garages. ' f r _10- Calls Indicating Resident Approval of Amendments Reported Ranallo - disputed the claim during the Commission hearing that residents had not been provided time for input to the process by reiterating that stories about the changes had been carried several times since last April; - said all the Councilmembers started getting calls, most of which were in favor of the changes, right after the Bulletin story in December; - contended that just because those residents weren' t present that night only meant they had assumed the Council knew how they felt and would be acting on that knowledge; Childs - reported getting a call that same day from a resident who supported the changes but stated the caller would be unable to attend the meeting that night; Sundland - told Mr. Lofgren the calls he had gotten had supported both the family size and parking restrictions, tying both in with the ugly appearance of front lawns after cars are parked there over the winter when parking is banned on the streets; said he perceived St. Anthony was a "bedroom community" and if the residents think the Council is makin a mis- take trying to keep it that way, he certainly hoped they would let them know during the period in which the new Ordinance amendments are given the required three readings before adoption. Council Action Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Makowske to direct the City Attorney to prepare Ordinance amendments with all five sections included, as proposed by the Planning Commission, for "fine tuning" by the Council during the three readings required by statute before adoption. The Council further requests the Attorney to include a time table during which more cars than four could be parked and persons could visit a household without violating the statutes. Before a vote on the motion was taken the following discussion evolved: Makowske - asked if the City could give variances which would address special circumstances like large families, etc. Childs - said he and Mr. Soth agreed that the Ordinance would probably recognize proof of a hardship as a compelling reason for allowing more cars for large families; -11- • added that the City would still be able to put con- ditions on such variances so as to require that all cars be parked on paved areas and limiting the time the variance would be in force. Soth - suggested the Council might even want to consider grant- ing conditional use permits for additional cars which would have to be applied for. Reasoner - suggested the City might even restrict the number of cars to the number of licensed drivers in a household. Marks - commented that by making these additions the Council might not be addressing what he perceived was the over- riding problem which had prompted the Ordinance changes in the first place, the fact that some houses have a number of unrelated people living in them who have noisy parties which are police problems; didn' t think the Ordinance would solve those problems if the amendments were modified to allow people to have guests parked in their driveways for the same amount of time as most of those parties last. Enrooth - replied that he had never thought the Ordinance changes • were intended to solve the problem of noisy parties because those are enforcement problems for the police; asked Councilmember Marks if he wanted to restrict graduation parties. Ranallo - agreed that it had not been noisy parties which had caused him to start the discussions about Ordinance changes way back in April, but rather, his first con- cern had been the number of businesses operated out of homes which had cropped up in the City lately; said his second concern was the number of unrelated people living in some St. Anthony homes, and, finally, he was concerned about the number of complaints he received about the appearance of lawns once cars parked on them all winter long are removed; perceived without the proposed Ordinance changes, the police are powerless to address the problems; called for the vote on the motion he had made. Motion carried unanimously. -12- Mayor Sundland thanked Commissioner Wagner for his report at the same time he congratulated him on his reappointment to serve as the Planning Commission Chair Pro Tem in 1987 . COUNCIL REPORTS Tax Exemptions for Home Improvements Discussed by Ramsey County League of Local Governments January 28th Councilmember Makowske reported the above discussion centered around the Ordinance St. Paul is seeking legislative authority to enact. The Ordinance would exempt certain home improvements for periods of five to ten years if enacted might prove helpful for similar projects St. Anthony might be facing in the future, according to the Councilmember. She reported the rest of the RCLLG meeting had been devoted to the selection and dismissal of city managers and clerks. League of Minnesota Cities Board Anticipating Tax Reform Bills in 1987 Councilmember Ranallo indicated the above discussions reinforced his perception that City officials should start lobbying their representatives in the State Legislature to protect the "bedroom communities" from "coming out on the short end" of the legislative effort to help the outstate communities. The Councilmember indicated • he anticipated the City would not fare well if the property tax classifications were cut as proposed, from 75 to 6. Chemical Abuse Information Committee to Sponsor Newspaper Column Councilmember Marks reported his committee had gotten a St. Mary' s Hospital chemical abuse evaluator to write a column on chemical dependency for the Bulletin and Northeaster on a regular basis, starting in early February. Planning Institute Schedule of Meetings Reported by Marks The Councilmember reported his participation in one of these government training sessions last week and said the Newly Elected Official Training sessions would be held the following week. He also indicated popular demand had prompted the scheduling of another Planning Institute for the St. Paul campus the first part of February. Mayor Reports St. Anthony' s Mill Rate to be One of Lowest in Hennepin Count The breakdown of mill rates outside the City of Minneapolis which all the Councilmembers had gotten, showed the City' s rates to be .30th out of 42 cities counted, according to the Mayor. Mr. Childs pointed out that the cities who were lower were all located west of Minneapolis, around Lake Minnetonka. -13- DEPARTMENTS AND COMMITTEES The report from the City Prosecutor, the Edward J. Hance law firm, related to matters conducted at the Hennepin County District Court on January 7 , 1987, was considered briefly before it was ordered filed as informational. CITY MANAGER' S REPORT The staff meeting notes for - January 20, 1987 were accepted as informational. City to Participate in Municipal Amicus Program The benefits of the above program were discussed with Mr. Childs and Mr. Soth. Councilmember Marks agreed that there were certainly a lot of laws which originated with the courts and although the cities should not have to lobby the judicial system, the realities of the situation seemed to justify the City' s participation. Councilmember Ranallo indicated he strongly supported the program. Mr. Soth, who is a member of CLEAR, which qualified St. Anthony to pay only 5% of its LMC dues, or approximately $175 a year for membership, explained what the program does is to try to influence the outcome of cases which could impact on the City. Council Action Motion by Marks, seconded by Enrooth to authorize the City to join the League of Minnesota Cities ' Municipal Amicus Program as long as the fees do not exceed $200. 00. Motion carried unanimously. Proclamation Declaring February as Heart Month Approved Mayor Sundland said he would be joining other Minnesota mayors in the Capitol Rotunda to personally present the City' s proclamation to the American Heart Association. This ceremony would kick off that association' s fund drive in Minnesota. Council Action Motion by Marks, seconded by Makowske to authorize the Mayor to proclaim February as Heart Month in St. Anthony. Motion carried unanimously. Council Passes Resolution Supporting Blaine Location for Olympic Development Facility Mr. Childs indicated the issue of getting this facility for a northern suburb had been presented during the Northern Mayors Association he had -14- attended January 22nd as indicated in the copy of the program' s presentation which he had included along with the proposed resolution in the Council' s agenda packet. The City Manager said as the Association had unsuccessfully lobbied to get a race track for a northern suburb location, they were organizing early to see what could be done to have the seventeen million dollar facility established in Anoka County. He said the Minnesota Olympic Facility Study Team were not only seeking the passage of a resolution supporting their efforts but also some strong lobbying efforts by north suburban officials to get the facility located in the northern metropolitan area if Governor Perpich' s efforts to get the facility for Minnesota are successful. Council Action Motion by Marks, seconded by Enrooth to adopt Resolution 87-009. RESOLUTION 87-009 A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF LOCATING AN OLYMPIC DEVELOPMENT FACILITY WITHIN ANOKA COUNTY AT THE BLAINE SOCCER COMPLEX • Motion carried unanimously. Board of Review Scheduled for April 14th Council Meeting Motion by Makowske, seconded by Marks to schedule the Board of Review to be conducted at 6: 30 P.M. prior to the Council' s regularly scheduled meeting, April 14, 1987 in accordance with the request of the Hennepin County Assessor. Motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS Engineer Presents Feasibility/Cost Study for Possible Completion of St. Anthony Boulevard Reconstruction Project Past the Golf Course Bob Robertson of Rieke Carroll Muller & Associates Engineering, gave a report on what the City would be facing in terms of construction costs and timing if St. Anthony decides to reconstruct the deteriorating roadway between the railroad bridge and Ridgeway Road east of Highway 88 with MSA funds. The engineer summarized the report the Councilmembers had been provided as well as the soil borings report he had distributed that evening as follows: • -15- Project 560 feet northerly from Ridgeway Road and the same dis- description: tance southerly from the Burlington Northern Railroad Bridge; existing road is 32 feet face to face from curb roadway is based in sandy clay with about six inches of concrete and two to three inch bituminous layer on top. Project cost: estimated to be $460, 000 based on engineer' s experience with other state MSA projects. City' s MSA $188 ,000 end of 1986 , about $105,000 in construction accumulation: funds expected 1987 , leaving the City approximately $167 ,000 short to do the project. Options for advance encumberance of MSA allotments of approximately funding $42 ,000 each year for the next two years; shortage: sale of municipal state aid bonds amounting to $60,000 each year; General Obligation Bonds with principal and interest payments not to exceed annual MSA allotment; • City could lend its own funds to the project to be paid back by encumbering four years of future allotments which would probably be sufficient to do the project; at about $10 a foot under the City' s assessment policy, the cemetery could be assessed about $30,000 for 2, 800 feet; Project based on MSA rules and regulations; design: 36 foot, face to face, 9 ton axle load; 31 inch total pavement thickness; 30 mile an hour design speed. Project with February 1st project design authorization, con- schedule: struction could start July lst. Road grade: would be retained because of existing sidewalks. Existing only two inches behind the curb on golf course, creating right-of-way: problems to widen road and for construction; engineers suggest negotiating an additional 5 foot per- manent easement and a temporary 10 feet from the Park Board; -16- City has preliminary agreement for permanent easement. Project 20 or 30 large trees whose roots would probably be cut problems: with construction which may or may not be lost and have to be replaced by Park Board; the removal costs for only three have been included in project cost; engineer estimated it would cost $600 a tree to cut down and remove stump and replacement cost would depend on size of replacement tree; should be paid for by Park Board because on their property. Drainage nothing beyond the construction area would be done; system: minimum size pipes would be replaced with larger 12 or 15 inch capacity pipes as required by City or extension later on. Curbing: would be tapered to 16 inches from existing 24 inches at ends of the project resulting in a savings for the • City. Lighting: conduits would be included in project cost but lights themselves would not because they are not MSA covered items unless they are needed at intersections for safety. Sidewalks: appear to be in relatively decent shape so not included in the project cost. Requirements that only one-half of the roadway be cut at a time and of contractor: excavations would be covered when ever possible to prevent flooding when it rains. The following points were discussed with the staff and engineer: Marks - asked if widening the street might not encourage speed- ing. Was told by the engineer that was a police enforcement problem. Mr. Hamer said the street width is based on traffic flow and recent counts show much more traffic on this section of St. Anthony Boulevard than on the resi- dential section just completed. Sundland - indicated skepticism that Park Board would ever agree to • pay for the trees which had to be replaced and saw the City facing a big expense if they had to replace 20 or . -17- 30, some 24 to 36 inch wide, trees which might be lost with the construction. Makowske - asked what other projects the City might be needing the MSA allotments for if this project depleted the City' s accumulation the next few years. Hamer - City is facing its share of replacing the 37th/Stinson intersection and might have to be looking at the poor condition of Wilson Street, the only other MSA street which hasn' t been reconstructed. Childs - indicated the City would not lose any of its MSA alloca- tion as long as the project is done before the summer of 1988. Enrooth - estimated if the City waited until 1988 to do the project, and if the prices still held, the shortage would only be from $60,000 to $80,000, $30,000 of which could be recovered from assessments. Marks - agreed that would leave time to seek a variance to build a 32 foot street which would cost from $30,000 to • $40,000 less to build and which would save the trees at the same time. Ranallo - indicated if Park Board agreed to replace their own trees which are endangered elms, the City could proceed with a 36 foot street this year. If they don' t, the savings in construction costs for a 32 foot street would almost match the cost of getting the money to pay for the project. Makowske - saw some value in getting that rough street surface replaced as soon as possible. Marks - agreed this project had not been given the highest priority but perceived it would be nice to get a drive- able street. Staff was directed to contact the Park 'Board and make an evaluation of the options presented by the engineer for paying for the project and to place the matter on a future Council agenda. It was agreed that the cemetery would be assessed and Mr. Childs indicated he was certain they would be glad to get the roadway improved and might agree to not having a public hearing to expedite the project. Requested Backhoe Equipment Approved for Public Works Department • Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Marks to approve the low quotation of $6,3456. 00 from Ziegle, Inc. for the purchase of a new backhoe mounted -18- hydraulic impact hammer as recommended by Larry Hamer in his January 21st memorandum to the City Manager. Motion carried unanimously. Dickson Electrical Awarded Contract to Re-wire Well #4 Mr. Hamer had explained in his January 21st memorandum that, if the electrical inspector can be convinced to let the City retain the existing service into the well building and does not persist in requiring underground service, the City will save $1,260. Council Action Motion by Ranallo, seconded by Enrooth to award the contract to re-wire Well #4 to the low bidder, Dickson Electric, for $4,005.00 which would be only $2,745.00 if the contractor can convince the Electrical Inspector that underground service is not necessary for the project. Motion carried unanimously. Variance for 44 Foot Width for 37th Avenue to be Sought from Department of Transportation Mr. Hamer indicated the above width would be in conformance with the �. width of St. Anthony' s road in that area and he was therefore recommending the City coMply with Columbia Heights' request that St. Anthony go along with the variance which would allow the reconstruction of 37th Avenue N.E. from Central Avenue to Stinson Boulevard N.E. at a 44 foot width rather than the 46 feet required by the Department of Transportation. Council Action Motion by Marks, seconded by Makowske to adopt Resolution 87-008. RESOLUTION 87-008 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE REQUEST WITH THE STATE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION RELATING TO RECONSTRUCTION ON 37TH AVENUE N.E. Motion carried unanimously. Public Works Director Instructed to Deny Request for Traffic Signal at Stinson Boulevard and 37th Avenue Intersection The Council agreed with Mr. Hamer' s recommendation that accident ratio to traffic counts did not warrant an expenditure of $35,000 by the City for the above signal which Columbia Heights perceives might increase • traffic speed into residential areas. . h • 1. -21- Respectfully 71 _Respectfully submitted, Helen Crowe, Secretary M or ATTEST: City Clerk :cjk