HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL PACKET 04162002 Meeting Sheet
IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII
iozass
Box: 27
Folder: PL PACKETS 2000-2004
Document: PL PACKET 04162002
.2
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
16, 2002
APRIL
7 p.m., Council Chambers
1. CALL TO ORDER .
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
4. PUBLIC INPUT
Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any item not included on the regular
agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, state their name and address for the
Clerk's record, and limit their remarks to five minutes.
5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
6. MEETING MINUTES
6.1 Review and Approve Planning Commission Minutes of March 19, 2002
7. COMMUNICATION FROM CITY COUNCIL
7.1 Designate a Planning Commission Member to the April 23, 2002, City Council Meeting
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1 Troy Martenson, 3645 Chelmsford.Road: subdivision request for single-family lot
8.2 Apache Animal Medicine, P.A., 2501 37th Avenue NE: sign variance request for one
additional ground sign
9. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION
9.1 Preliminary Site Plan for Culvers Restaurant, 4004 Silver Lake Road
9.2 Northwest Quadrant Redevelopment Update
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS
11. ADJOURNMENT
ATTENTION PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS:
IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING, PLEASE CONTACT SUE HENRY AT
612-706-1324.
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2
3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
4
5 MARCH 19, 2002
6 7:00 P.M.
7
8
9 I. CALL TO ORDER
10 Chair Melsha called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
11
12 II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
13 Chair Melsha invited the Council and the audience to join in the Pledge of Allegiance.
14
15 III. ROLL CALL.
16 Commissioners present: Chair Melsha; Vice Chair Stille; Commissioners, Hanson,
17 Steeves, Thomas, and Tillman.
18 Absent: Commissioner Hoska.
19 Also present: Assistant City Manager Susan Henry.
20
21
22 IV. PUBLIC INPUT.
23 Hearing no comments, Chair Melsha moved forward with the agenda.
24
25 V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
26 Motion by Commissioner.Steeves, second by Commissioner Thomas, to approve the meeting
27 agenda.
28
29 Motion carried unanimously.
30
31 VI. MEETING MINUTES.
32 6.1 Review and Approve the Planning Commission meeting,minutes of February 19, 2002.
33
34 Motion by Commissioner Hanson, second by Commissioner Thomas, to approve the
35 Planning Commission meeting minutes of February 19, 2002.
36
37 Motion carried unanimously.
38
39 VII. COMMUNICATION FROM CITY COUNCIL.
40 7.1 Designate a Planning Commission member to the City Council regular meeting of April
41 9, 2002.
42 Chair Melsha indicated that Commissioner Hanson was available to attend the City
43 Council meeting on April 9, 2002.
44
45 VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
46 8.1 Village North, LLP, 280137 1h Avenue Northeast, Amend the Conditional Use Permit for
47 Essenco, a candle manufacturer.
48 Chair Melsha opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m.
49
1
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 2
1 Henry indicated that the applicant, Ken Solie of Village North LLP, property owner of
2 the light industrial building at 2801 37`h Avenue Northeast, is requesting an amendment
3 to their current Conditional Use Permit. She indicated that the applicant is asking to
4 remove the September'1, 2002 expiration date and, in its place, place no expiration date.
5.
6 Henry provided the Commission with a background on the issue from January 8, 2002
7 until the present. She indicated that, over the past several months, neighboring residents
8 have been calling city offices complaining of the nuisance of strong candle-related
9 smells.
10
11 Henry also stated that Essenco has stated that it is important for them to know where they
12 stand now, rather than later, as their busy season is nearby when the Conditional Use
13 Permit expires on September 1, 2002.
14
15 Chair Melsha provided the public with a few rules before residents came forward to
16 speak. Primarily, Chair Melsha requested that residents use the microphone and keep
17 comments as direct and succinct as possible.
18
19 Steve Levitus, owner of Essenco, came forward to address the Commission and residents.
20 He stated that they have retained the services of McGinley and Associates, a world-
21 renowned sensory expert who deals with odor mitigation. Levitus indicated that
22 McGinley provided Essenco with a report and recommendation which has been
23 distributed to the Commission.
24
25 Levitus stated that McGinley indicated that the installation of the proposed equipment
26 would reduce the level of fragrance and the frequency of fragrance migration by at least
27 75%. He indicated that the proposal consists of a system of collection, filtration, and
28 dilution.
29
30 Levitus reviewed a diagram that illustrated the United Operations exhaust ducting
31 system, the Farr brand carbon filtration system, and the Stobic Air brand roof mounted
32 fan for the"Fragrance Mitigation Plan."
33
34 Levitus indicated that the proposed exhaust system would achieve a noticeable reduction
35 in the strength of the fragrance that is how being observed in the surrounding
36 neighborhood and would reduce the frequency that the fragrance is observed. He added
37 that the reduction in strength and frequency of fragrance would come form the carbon
38 filtration of the fragrance within the building.
39
40 Levitus indicated that they were very confident that this would make the fragrance
41 problem better, reducing the complaints by 1/3.
42
2
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 3
1 Chair Melsha indicated that Levitus and Solie initially indicated that they could control
2 the smell, and asked what has changed. Levitus indicated that the expert consultant has
3 changed things.
4
5 Chair Melsha indicated that the entire concern initially was that the City wanted to .
6 maintain some control, thus they attached the time limit to the conditional use permit. He
7 added that Levitus and Solie said that they would fix problems during the time of the
8 conditional use permit, and they have not. Levitus stated that he was not willing to spend
9 $50,000- $80,000 to have a permit that lasts for five more months.
10
11 Commissioner Thomas indicated that he spoke with a research scientist at the State
12 Department of Health who was familiar with McGinley and Associates. He stated that
13 she informed him that there was no guarantee that the odors could be mitigated 100%of
14 the-time. Levitus stated that was his understanding.
15
16 Commissioner Thomas asked if one of the reasons for the request to remove the timeline
17 from the conditional use permit was because they could not guarantee 100%mitigation to
18 the satisfaction of the residents. Levitus stated the reason for the amendment request was
19 to do normal business planning.
20
21 Vice Chair Stille asked about ongoing maintenance of the system. Levitus stated that the
22 filters would be changed by their own maintenance staff, and would be changed
23 anywhere from once a month to once/quarter. He stated that the cost of the filters was
24 about $2,000 per filter.
25
26 Chair Melsha asked who was responsible for the installation of system, and maintenance
27 between he and Solie. Levitus stated they have not yet determined that. He stated that
28 they discussed sharing the cost, perhaps at a ratio of 50-50.-
29
30 Vice Chair Stille asked how the plant would be cool enough in the summer with the
31 exchange of air that will be taking place with the filtration system. Levitus indicated that
32 he was not an engineer, and could not answer for certain; he stated that he was relying
33 on McGinley for that type of information.
34
35 Commissioner Tillman referred to the last paragraph of McGinley's letter where he
36 describes testing the performance of the system. Levitus stated that he could not answer
37 too much regarding the system's operations. Tillman asked if there had been any work
38 done on the system thus far. Levitus indicated that they have not done any work yet,but
39 would begin doing work before the system was installed.
40
41 Commissioner Thomas asked why they left their last site. Levitus stated that the landlord
42 was getting upset because there was a tenant above the plant, a doctor's center, and the
43 fragrance migrated through the floor, causing problems. Levitus added that they
44 negotiated an agreement with the landlord to leave.
3
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 4
1
2 Commissioner Thomas asked about reports of employees getting ill at the doctor's office.
3 Levitus indicated that he recalled one or two employees of the clinic as having problems.
4
5 Resident Kim Shaddrick, 2510-37`h Avenue Northeast, came forward to address the
6 Commission. She brought a couple of candles and indicated that Essenco was making
7 candles in glass, and good quality candles (according to Linens `n Things), such as theirs,
8 would cost about$20.00. Shaddrick's point was that they could afford the exhaust
9 system.
10
11 Shaddrick distributed a copy of the resident petition to the Commission. She expounded
12 on the fact that the City requested that residents do their part and call in with their
13 complaints regarding the odor, which she very confidently stated that they had done.
14
15 She reminded everyone that the issue at hand is business, and that Levitus and Solie do
16 not seem to mind what practices they perform and however they may tarnish their own
17 reputation in order to get their desired result.
18
19 Shaddrick referred to the manufacturing and non-manufacturing hours, and asked if the
20 non-manufacturing hours had been dropped. She stated that there have been workers at
21 the plant until 11:00 p.m.
22
23 Shaddrick stated that the residents were fighting for air-quality. She stated that Levitus
24 mentioned the cost of the exhaust system which, she noted, was simply the cost of doing
25 business, and oftentimes a tax write-off.
26
27 Shaddrick concluded by requesting that, instead of making more promises, Essenco
28 commit to what has already been approved for them, or leave St. Anthony.
29
30 Vice Chair Stille asked Shaddrick about the potential harm to residents regarding air-
31 quality and lifestyle. Shaddrick stated that she does not call the city unless she finds the
32 odor offensive and obtrusive. She stated that she goes back inside when the odor is
33 present.
34
35. Dwight Skinner, 3629 Edward Street, stated he had four points.of which were a concern
36 to him: wintertime, on-going maintenance and associated costs, conditional use permits
37 exist with the conditional use in order for the City to maintain control, proposal
38 presented by Levitus tonight seems to be more of a contract than a proposal.
39
40 Doug Tanner, 2206 St. Anthony Parkway, asked if there was anyone on the Commission
41 who has not experienced the odor. Commissioner Tillman was the only commissioner
42 who had not smelled the odor.
43
4
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 5
1 Jennifer Tanner, 2614-37`h Avenue Northeast, indicated that a group of residents from the
2 community came together and comprised the petition that was presented this evening.
3 She reviewed the details of the petition.
4
5 Chair Melsha asked about the direct effects of the odor on Tanner. She referred to a day
6 when she was shoveling for hours and smelled the odor the entire time. She added that,
7 emotionally, it has affected her.
8
9 Tanner indicated that she and her husband are currently bringing their home up to code,
10 which has been extremely stressful. She added that she and other residents have really
11 invested a great deal of time in their efforts to get Essenco out.
12
13 Chair Melsha asked what, as residents, they have to do differently. Tanner indicated that
14 her option is to go inside her home,which she does not want to have to do in the spring
15 and summer months.
16
17 Doug Tanner returned with some comments. He briefly summarized what has transpired
18 since the November 20, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. He highlighted the fact
19 that, at that time, they were told that there would be no odor emitted.
20
21 Tanner referred to the costs associated with the exhaust system, which were capital costs,
22 and would make the property more attractive to other buyers. He added that the
23 installation of the exhaust system would make his previous statements of caring about the
24 residents of the community truthful.
25
26 Tanner stated that he was assuming that Solie was only the landlord and property owner
27 and had no financial interest in Essenco. He added that Levitus prematurely began
28 operations, which would be reason enough to not continue conducting business with him.
29
30 Tanner referred to property values, and the effect that the odor would have on properties
31 within a certain area of the manufacturing plant. He indicated that, under the law,
32 anything that effects the enjoyment of the property must be divulged at the time of the
33 sale of the property.
34
35 Tanner concluded that Essenco has taken advantage of the City if St. Anthony. He
36 indicated that he has learned from the experience to check references, etc. He thanked
37 the Commission for allowing him to speak, and participate in the process, as he has
38 gained a great deal of knowledge.
39
40 Tanner requested that the Commission recommend that the September 1, 2002 deadline
41 remain in place.
42
5
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 6
1 Tanner commended the Commission's presence at the City Council meeting of
2 December 18, 2001 and stated that he wished that the Council would have given the
3 findings of the Planning Commission more credence.
4
5 Commissioner Steeves asked if Tanner had the names of the realtors with whom he
6 spoke.
7 Tanner could not recall the names. Tanner re-stated that anything that effects the
8 enjoyment of the property would need to be divulged to potential buyers.
9
10 Resident Beth Anderson, 2604 37`h Avenue Northeast, came forward to share her
11 concerns. She referred to the issue of winter when a small amount of time is spent
12 outside. She referred to her concern over the relationships between fragrances and
13 allergies. She asked what happens if the fragrances are not mitigated by summertime.
14
15 Resident Doug Patrick, 3633 Edward Street, asked if they were going to go from air
16 pollution to noise pollution. He asked what guarantee the City has that they will install
17 the exhaust system.
18
19 Resident John Mindotte, 3420 Highcrest stated his concern was with allergies. He added
20 that health is the most important thing in life, and the Commission needs to do its part in
21 protecting the health of the community.
22
23 Resident Bud Bjorke, 3626 Coolidge Street Northeast, stated that what was happening
24 was not acceptable. He stated that a home would never sell, if buyers caught a whiff of
25 the odor. He added that the issue of addressing the level of odor was highly subjective,
26 and concluded that he was not against new business in the City of St. Anthony,but that it
27 needs to be the right business.
28
29 Doug Bergstrom, 3620 Edward Street Northeast, stated that he agreed with Bjorke's
30 comments that odor measurement was very subjective. He questioned how the issue of
31 odor would be regulated by the city. He suggested that there should be some allowance
32 where the city can retain some tools to provide further enforcement, if possible.
33
34 Chair Melsha indicated that they have already taken that path.
35
36 Resident Denise Studer, 3631 Harding Street, stated her concern with allergies, as she
37 and her husband and three children all have allergies.
38
39 Chair Melsha invited Levitus to address the concerns that have been raised.
40
41 Levitus stated he had only a few things to say. He stated that he has had allergies all of
42 his life, he indicated that the odors in his business have never effected him. He indicated
43 that the fragrances used in his products are synthetic, and not from essential oils.
44
6
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 7
. 1 Levitus referred to his employees, and stated that no one has quit, nor been adversely
2 effected by the fragrances.
3
4 Levitus stated that Solie and himself have kept logs of their own. He stated that they
5 have not noticed any fragrance odors farther than across the street from the plant, where
6 Jennifer Tanner and her husband live.
7
8 Levitus stated that Solie has no financial investment in Essenco, and that their
9 relationship is strictly one of landlord/tenant.
10
11 Levitus stated that there is a lot of information on the issue that is not factual, and stated
12 that the process should be based on the merits of facts.
13
14 Levitus stated that they, too,have spent a lot of time on this process. He stated that he
15 puts his trust in the experts, and is confident that this proposal will alleviate the problem
16 to a very great extent.
17
18 Commissioner Steeves asked if they were to adopt some sort of language to the
19 conditional use permit that would require Essenco to make best efforts to reduce the odor
20 being emitted to an acceptable level, and perhaps attach a minimum annual dollar figure.
21 Commissioner Steeves,asked because if, a year down the road, there are still fragrance
22 issues, would they be willing to do whatever necessary and continue making investments.
23
24 Levitus stated that he felt that they were exercising their best efforts at this time, and was
25 uncertain that he could answer that question at this time.
26
27 Chair Melsha asked what would happen after they made the initial investment through
28 McGinley and Associates, and it was determined that there was no appreciable
29 improvement in the odor. Levitus stated that the business could not afford hundreds and
30 thousands of dollars.
31
32 Chair Melsha asked if Levitus thought that, in its current form, the odor was harmful to
33 residents. Levitus stated that he does not find the odor objectionable.
34
35 Levitus stated that he was uncertain that any amount of money invested in the operation
36 would be enough to satisfy the residents.
37
38 Commissioner Hanson asked, if the city did not decide to grant the amendment, what
39 were the future plans for Essenco. Levitus stated his future plans were to move outside
40 of the city of St. Anthony.
41
42 Commissioner Steeves asked about the noise levels of the proposed exhaust system.
43 Levitus indicated that there exists the option to put a silencer on the fan, which they
44 would do.
7
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 8
1
2 Chair Melsha closed the public hearing at 8:48 p.m.
3
4 Chair.Melsha stated that, if they were to approve the amendment,he was uncertain as to
5 what conditions they would attach that would be a way to measure conduct. He added
6 that, as long as the proposed use fits within the statutes for conditional uses, it is granted.
7 Chair Melsha indicated that the general exception to that is when the use would interfere
8 with the general health, safety and welfare of the residents.
9
10 Chair Melsha stated that the track record with the applicants has been disappointing, and
11 indicated that he felt that there is a sufficient basis to deny the request to lift the deadline.
12
13 Commissioner Tillman asked what the Planning Commission was doing tonight, and how
14 a conditional use permit could be revoked. Chair Melsha stated that they have to fail to
15 comply with the conditions.
16
17 Henry stated that there would have to be proof of failure to comply with the conditions,
18 but that the city could revoke a permit.
19
20 Vice Chair Stille stated that he was having a difficult time with the issue, considering the
21 light industrial aspect. He stated that he was very intent on listening to anything that
22 residents would say regarding how the smell affected their lives.
23
24 Vice Chair Stille stated that documentation shows that the odor does get worse in the
25 summertime. He stated that they have a potential health and welfare problem with
26 Essenco. He stated that the system needs to be put in, and then a decision made.
27
28 Commissioner Steeves echoed Vice Chair Stille's comments. He stated that he feels that
29 there has been some testimony to health and real estate issues. He added that the
30 difficulty was in the quantifying of the odor to a level of satisfaction.
31
32 Commissioner Steeves stated that they needed to draft some language that allowed the
33 extension,but allows for the city to intervene, if deemed necessary. He stated that he
34 was uncomfortable with denying the request.
35
36 Chair Melsha asked Commissioner Steeves for some language suggestion.
37 Commissioner Steeves suggested they recommend an annual dollar amount, requiring a
38 certain number of replacements per year, and still the ability of the city to add additional
39 mitigation dollars, as they felt necessary.
40
41 Vice Chair Stille stated that the issues are still subjective.
42
8
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 9
1 Chair Melsha stated that he appreciates the expense to the company, but not to the extent
2 that they should amend their conditional use permit. He stated that he was comfortable
3 with the terms that the city granted in January.
4
5 Commissioner Thomas stated he has done some research with land use, and stated that he
6 would be in favor of denying the amendment this evening.
7
8 Commissioner Thomas referred to some of the language contained in the Illinois
9 Environmental Policy Review.
10
11 Commissioner Thomas stated that, rather than trying to get the conditional use permit to
12 work, he feels it should not be there at all.
13
14 Commissioner Hanson stated that, as a business owner, he is aware that capital
15 expenditures are a necessary risk.
16
17 Commissioner Tillman stated that the conditional use permit route was happening exactly
18 how she envisioned that it would. She stated that she was not comfortable with taking
19 away the temporary period.
20
21 The Planning Commission discussed the findings that they would place along with
22 suggesting denial of.the request.
23
24 Motion by Vice Chair Stille, second by Commissioner Thomas, to recommend denying
25 the request by Village North, LLP, 280137 1h Avenue Northeast, to amend the
26 Conditional Use Permit for Essenco, based on the following findings:
27
28 • Persistence of odor causes a diminished ability to enjoy surrounding property,
29 thus, affecting the welfare of residents.
30 • Odor could be injurious to people working in other parts of the building that
31 Essenco now occupies.
32 • Likely to have a negative impact on property values.
33 • Odor is offensive to any person, not just a sensitive person.
34 • Track record of applicants has reduced level of confidence in their future ability
35 to perform in compliance.
36
37 Motion carried unanimously.
38
39 VI. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION.
40 8.1 Northwest Quadrant Redevelopment Update.
41 Henry stated that Prosser has begun a project update for Councilmembers, which is also
42 posted on the website. She added that, although the project is in its infancy, there is
43 actually a lot going on with the project.
44
9
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
March 19, 2002
Page 10
1 X. ANNOUNCEMENTS.
2 Commissioner Hanson referred to Commissioner Thomas' findings that the above finding was a
3 land use issue. He suggested that the Council look at using a TIF to purchase the site.
4
5 . Commissioner Thomas provided the Commission with an update on the point-of-sale housing
6 ordinance. He indicated that the Council was split on their feelings about a point-of-sale housing
7 ordinance. He stated that the Council recommended that Commissioner Thomas return with a
8 report as to why they should go forward with the ordinance.
9
10 Commissioner Thomas indicated that legislation may have done the work for them by passing a
11 proposal for a statewide housing ordinance (it has not yet passed). He stated that the proposed
12 housing ordinance is designed to protect the brokers.
13
14 Commissioner Thomas stated that he and Commissioner Hanson were concerned about how to
15 facilitate the upgrading of the housing stock for the City of St. Anthony. He stated that, if the
16 commission felt that it was a worthwhile effort, they would continue.
17
18 Chair Melsha asked if Commissioners Hanson and Thomas would be willing to get an outline
19 together for the Commission and Council to view.
20
21 Commissioner Steeves commended everyone that came forward this evening, and felt that the
22 result was a good one.
23
24 Commissioner Steeves stated that the city was receiving a great deal of positive press on the
25 Northwest Quadrant Redevelopment Project.
26
27 Chair Melsha echoed Commissioner Steeves comments in terms of thanking the residents and
28 fellow commissioners.
29
30 Vice Chair Stille thanked Commissioner Hoska for all of his work on the Essenco issue, as well
31 as the residents and other Commissioners.
32
33 Henry indicated that she, Mayor Hodson and a couple of consultants would be meeting.with Ted
34 Mondale and the Met Council tomorrow. ,
35
36 XI. ADJOURNMENT.
37 Motion by Chair Melsha, second by Commissioner Hanson, to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
38
39 Motion carried unanimously.
40
41 Respectfully submitted,
42
43 Courtney Seesz
44 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
10
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 04/10/02 MEETING DATE: 04/16/02
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Susan Henry, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: 3645 Chelmsford Road Subdivision Request
Requested Action:
Troy Martenson, property owner of the single-family residential lot at 3645 Chelmsford
Road, is requesting a lot split.
Background:
Mr. Martenson contacted city staff several months ago about the feasibility of splitting
the single-family residential property at 3645 Chelmsford. Because of the lack of details
and sufficient information, staff recommended to him to get a surrey completed. Staff
also noted to Mr. Martenson that he needed to be the property owner when bringing the
subdivision request forward. Since that time, the survey has been completed and Mr.
Martensen has closed on the property. Staff has requested proof of ownership
paperwork but has. not yet received the documentation, like a purchase agreement or
deed.
The survey submitted by Mr. Martenson depicts two parcels: A and B. Parcel A is drawn
to be a substandard lot of 6,420 square feet. Once the lot is split as proposed, Parcel A
would become the interior lot. According to city code, interior lots are to be a minimum of
9,000 square feet or less than 75 feet in width at the building setback line.
Parcel B is drawn to be 17,120 square feet, which needs to be a minimum of 11,000
square feet, or less than 90 square feet in width at the building setback line, to meet city
code requirements; this drawn parcel far exceeds that standard.
Parcel B's setbacks are not written to city code in relation to the proposed building
shown on the survey. The minimum rear yard must have a depth equal to the greater of
20% of the depth of the entire lot or 25 feet; the survey shows 13 feet. The minimum
front yard must have a depth equal to the greater of 30 feet or a distance equal to the
average of the front yard depths of the two adjacent lots; the survey shows 26 feet. It
should be noted that Parcel A does not meet some of city code minimum standards;
however, this is the parcel with the existing home and detached garage.
The total square footage of the subject property is 23,540 (107 X 220) square feet.
Although this is enough square footage to technically split the property into two, it is not
all-usable square footage due to the easements on the property. Mr. Martenson did not
know of the easements until after he acquired the property and the survey was
completed. Prior to the April 16 Planning Commission meeting, he plans to check with
Northern States Power on the details about the 75 foot overhead lines easement.
Mr. Martenson and Pioneer Engineering, the surveyor, both received copies of the City's
ordinance as it pertains to the single-family zoning district and subdivision of land.
Prior to receiving the survey and when in discussions with city staff about the lot split,
Mr. Martenson's sketches on a city plat map showed Parcel A at 9,095 square feet and
Parcel B at 14,445 square feet(see attached).
City staff offered to meet and discuss the subdivision request in relation to the city code
with the applicant. He said he wanted to wait until after the April 16 public hearing.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the lot subdivision because it does not meet minimum lot
standards nor does it meet the setbacks required by city ordinance. By approving this lot
split, the City would be approving a substandard lot (Parcel A). Mr. Martenson is aware
of staffs recommendation and is looking for direction on how he might proceed in
working with the City to redevelop the property.
Attachments:
• Application for Subdivision
• Survey
Date: 12A0101
Fee: $150.00
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION/PLAT APPROVAL
Applicant: ��� ��rt� n Phone: 763-20'3 -0S10
Address: 2300 L-OJ o r- Qr t4y vil S (.),PA) M1 ') S±112-
Status
±112Status of Applicant (Owner, Buyer, Renter, Agent, etc.): �yt-1�►�
Present Legal Description of Property to be Affected: V(D � Z-aZ_3iI oOoq
the •
alp f-t D� im a of-
Proposed Legal Description of Property to be Affected:
Street Address: �t7y �� C' (iM,1�Ord (�,.�•
Zoning District in Which Property is Located: (�
Specify Any Necessary Easements:
Area of the Plat/Subdivision: 9 OC 2 �V
Number of Parcels: 1 3pl (07X7,W M-6 Z ( O-
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.
1P -20 A *150 . 000F
00 020 o n
6G
1 OOC NO
DOC o
1339.5 SO NO 282 'o DOC NO .. a, 4893250 QI 3 . t DOC NO
COC NO �. I f 4901047 v ,
^ 1575539 r5i81i4-* - 1 _ ___�.�1- 1- - - - - - �-- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - -- - -
-
- - • -- - - - - - - - - - 94 35 -107.. q,
13 .4; 3s
5c� �
UV (2JS
8) (4)(29) (3)
fL2 84 �S j7
n
a
O
,
15 16 192
(32) ;� !114) (34)
,
CIL
-T7 84.46
1
m
480.3
i
14 s (20) (21)
480.3
' 84.44 64 ' 84
o
34.4Z do
`J I
9 (7)
8s o
• , c
• -ti
,
' 16
(23) (24) _ (25)
480.3
84.42
95 35
so so Z5 Tfi 76 76676
n 13 a 14 ,- �_ i5 ^ c 1 IL' 2 n 3 rg 4 5 g
(10) (()) (12) (106) (107) (108) "_' (109)
,
1
1
BS '
79.4 95 , 8O L76 76 76 16 76 75.3
Addendum to Subdivision Application
Current owner; Stanley Horowicki (seller)
Sellers real estate agent Joe Letourneau (65,1)639.6369
Buyer; Troy and Tricia Martenson
763.208.0510
Projected closing date 2/15/02
Current zoning R1
Plat map is the city's copy.
Approx Acreage = .44
Southern adjoining neighbor; Annie Burns 3635 Chelmsford Rd
Eastern adjoining neighbor .354o7 ,571
}
LAA.L
l
ple. S w�l/ ler ll� o�� f �. ✓�
I�
1�
f
�f
i
I
ii
f�
i
.i
I'
I��
.>� 2422 Enterprise Drive
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
* PIONEER LAND SURVEYORS • CIVIL ENGINEERS (651) 681-1914 FAX:681-9488
engineering LAND PLANNERS • LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS' 625 Highway 10 N.E.
Blaine, MN 55434
* * (763) 783-1880 FAX:783-1883
Description Sketch for: TROY MARTENSON
House Address: 3645 Chelmsford Road
-North line of the NE 1/4 of Sec. 6
N89031'1 2"E;
107.00 _ 853.62
i 1
NE COR SEC. 6
37TH AVE. NE (C0. RD. N0. 93)
g 40.00 foot Roadway Easement 0 g
Per Doc. No. 4901042 \ v 0
\ lo/ ' VOSTINC CVRB
SET P L FNJIP
1
�-3' Wood Fence-�--- i
n
I 5 I 1
1
I
--- -
PP
--------------------7^- -----'----
oCenterline of, a 75.00 foot NSP __ oEasement per Doc.. No. 1675929o
(4 Overhead Lines) 6� n
@i n
PARCEL B o iv
M 0 .1 0 n 1
N - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - N�- - - - - - - - - - --
I .0 00 N �- '� t1 .2 N 0
ON t�,.� N
I r
a) k - I
W I eJ\�\
Of
I0 s
li. =' a I S0 EX
U) ala C! N�
f3eorings shown are assumed I rn sa99r12'w ;1 10700 GARAGE 3
rn
_ W ° sTEPs PARCEL A w W
00 O0 -C1 41 L
I o 1.41
.� of o D�AIL
b: ��_
I O t25.9' g Sob. % X3.9' °
H .y '�/ FENCE '
3 a ' 'r. rENatoaa. bL 53
I 5 I 5 PS FND 1' IP/
� E STING _� DRIVEWAY \GARAGE' - ±1.20-N
I ±0.53--
Wood F
� `22.
I N89°31'12"E 107 O si •�
`� e' wood Fence �_South line of North 220 feet
I I Ex
HOUSE
II
-v-Denotes Power Pole 60 /as'FND I�
\'0,0.e2' NOTE:
-0E- Denotes Overhead Electric Lines
t0.e2 N 1. There Iso 0.6 fence encroachment at the
- x Denotes Existing Fence. I t0.4e E/
southeast corner of this lot.
`AIL
EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The north 220.00 feet of the west 107.00 feet of the east 960.60 feet of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6,
Township 29, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
PARCEL A
The south 60.00 feet of the north 220.00 feet of the west 107.00 feet of the east 960.60 feet of the Northeast
Quarter of Section 6. Township 29, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (+/- 6,420 Sq. Ft. -- 0.15 Acres)
PARCEL 8
That part of the north 220.00 feet of the west 107.00 feet of the east 960.60 feet of the Northeast Quarter of
Section 6, Township 29, Range 23,. Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying north of the south 60.00 feet, thereof.
17,120 Sq. Ft. -- 0.39 Acres)
We hereby certify to Troy Martenson that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I
am a duly licensed Land Surveyor under the.lows of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 2 1' day of 'EBR-.06 a ' A.D., 2002.
Signed: PIONEER ENGINEERING, P.A.
By.
Scale: 1 inch = 3 O eet Terrence E. Rothenbocher,
L.S. R g. No. 20595
L2145 202026BTS.DWG Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. Reg. No. 40361
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 04/10/02 MEETING DATE: 04/16/02
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Susan Henry, Assistant City Managerxk,
SUBJECT: Apache Animal Medicine Sign Variance Request
Requested Action:
Apache Animal Medicine, P.A., owner of the commercially zoned property at 2501 37'
Avenue Northeast, is requesting a sign variance for an additional ground sign.
Background:
Apache Animal Medicine currently has one ground sign that was installed earlier this
year (see attached sign permit). They are asking for another ground sign for
identification purposes because of two distinct businesses located in one building. This
request requires a variance because city code states that one principal structure of a
parcel of land is allowed one ground sign, regardless of the number of tenants in the
building.
Apache Animal Medicine states an additional ground sign would relieve an undue
hardship and correct extraordinary circumstances. In particular, the applicant points to
preexisting setbacks and the railroad, forcing two entrances. Also the applicant
mentions the need to maintain separation between healthy pets (Apache Grooming and
Boarding) and potentially ill pets (Apache Animal Hospital) with two entrances. Finally,
the applicant states they want to be able to clearly tell clients where the entrances are
with safety concerns regarding traffic on 37h Avenue.
According to city code, ground signs must be affixed to the ground by means of a base
with no visibility between the bottom of the sign and the base on which it is attached,
and landscaped to enhance the appearance of the signage. Currently, the sign is open
as drawn and city staff has asked the applicant to fill in the gap, as code requires.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the variance request/additional ground sign on the
contingency that the current sign on the property be brought up to city code by filling in
the gap between the bottom of the sign and the base to which it is attached with agreed
upon materials. The second ground sign approved with this variance should be built
identically to the first sign. In addition, the applicant must meet all other code
requirements as it relates to ground signs.
Attachments:
• Application for Variance
• Sign drawings
• Sign permit for first ground sign
• Site plan
I
Date: I 23 O Z
Fee:
R-1 . . . . . . $ 6 0
Other . . . . 100.00
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY VILLAGE
Petition for Variance
Applicant: A aa A e. jL lVec4 iciive IOA_ Phone: 6 (z - 28/ - 273
Address: a 37 v-e loCST. A►gtka rap,
Status of Applicant (Owner, Buyer, Lessee, etc.): /:2Wyar
Legal Description of property proposed for variance:
Street Address: 2-561 a2`1' NZ <5/,, Ae a-kbi r Uf Il U M N
Presently Zoned: oy V"'e, n
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 or lot, 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 the City Ordinance and has not been
created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel of land.
Signature of Applic
*1 00 . 00tK
i
Variances. (1665.06)
Application. An owner of property with an existing structure which does not comply
with the Zoning Code, or of property on which such a'structure is proposed to be
constructed, may apply for a variance upon payment of the fee as specified in the
Zoning Ordinance.
Council Approval. Variances to the dimensional provisions of the Zoning Code may
be granted by the Council upon recommendation of the Planning Commission, after a
public hearing is held by the Planning Commission. Variances will not be granted
with respect to uses. A majority of affirmative votes by the Councilmembers present
is required to approve a variance request.
Evidence. No variance.will be granted unless the evidence presented by the petitioner
discloses all of the following facts:
(a) The subject matter of the application is within the scope of the Zoning
Ordinance subsection regarding variances.
(b) Strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause undue hardship
because:
1.) The property cannot be put to a reasonable use without the
variance.
2.) The circumstances causing the hardship were not created by the
owner.
3.) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of
the locality.
4.) Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the hardship.
(c) The circumstances causing,the hardship are unique to the individual
property under consideration.
(d) The granting of the variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of
the Zoning Code.
Planning Commission Recommendation. The Planning Commission will consider the
application at a public hearing at any regular or special meeting. Notice for the public
hearing will be given in accordance with Section 115 of the City Ordinance. The Planning
Commission, sitting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals, will make a recommendation
to the Council as follows:
(a) Recommend that the variance application can be granted because the
evidence considered at the meeting supports each of the findings
APACHE ANIMAL MEDICINE, P.A.
44FI 2501 - 37th Avenue N.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55421
Telephone (612) 781-2734
Mpg
As the owner of Apache Animal Hospital, I would like to request a variance in the city
code to allow us to have two monument signs associated with our building. I believe we
meet the specified conditions as outlined below.
1. Relieve an undue hardship
-- Apache Animal Hospital is 160 feet long and we have approximately 500 feet
of frontage on 37`x' Avenue. Our two parking lots are 225 feet apart. In order
for our clients to know which lot to park in, we would like two signs to clearly
mark each end of the building.
-- While planning the expansion of our building, we encountered difficulty with the
layout due to the railroad along the north side and the new setback requirements.
Due to these factors, we needed to lay the clinic out with two separate entrances
and parking lots. One entrance would be for hospital patients and the other for
patients needing grooming or boarding. Without the separate entrances and parking
lots, we would not have adequate parking for clients and staff according to city
requirements.
-- The two monument signs are necessary to alleviate confusion for our clients.
For 27 years, our hospital entrance has been on the west side of the building.
The new entrance for the hospital will be on the east side, and the current entrance
will become the entrance for grooming and boarding.
-- A large percentage of our clientele are senior citizens and we don't want them to
accidentally go to the wrong entrance, then have to get in their car and pull onto
37`h avenue to get to the other lot. Two signs that can be easily seen from the street
would alleviate this problem.
2. Correct extraordinary circumstances
-- As a hospital that also provides grooming and boarding, we don't want healthy
animals that are coming for boarding and grooming to be exposed to potentially
ill animals waiting to be seen at the hospital. That is another reason why we
designed the building with two entrances. We would need to have separate sign to
help inform clients which entrance they needed based on the service they required.
3. Caused by the City Ordinance
-- The ordinance allowing only one sign per building will cause a lot of confusion for
our clientele. We have approximately 13, 000 clients who would probably
automatically.go to our`old" entrance without a sign that clearly labeled the
difference.
-- We are also concerned for client safety. If a client pulled into the wrong parking
lot, realized their error, and then pulled back onto 37`h Avenue to drive 225 feet
to the next lot, they could very easily be rearended by traffic as 37`' Avenue is a
very busy street.
In closing, I believe we meet the criteria for a variance based on the fact that we were
limited on our building design by preexisting setbacks and the railroad, forcing us to
create to entrances; we need to maintain separation between healthy pets and potentially
ill pets with two entrances; our clients need to be able to clearly tell where they need to
enter the building; and to help eliminate safety concerns regarding traffic on 37`h Avenue.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Terrence E. Rapacz, VM
�p•—ry
"j.G�1���-N ':� _ .=�'.I1�i..G �Z' STK•'- � .�
Vo
7 7:
� .
i �: t ,
I
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
3301 Silver Lake Road / St. Anthony, MN 55418 / (612) 789-8881 • FAX (612) 781-9323
BUILDING PERMIT N2 5233 33 3 ,j
JOB ADDRESS •-/ ` „ PROPERTY•I.D.NO.
LQ�
(0. SEE ATTACHED SHEET) r)
1 DE ALA. 6/ �/�. UNPLATTED PROPERTY f C
v/ '
OWNER C MAI RESS /) ZIP PHONE
' 2 �2'1
CONTRACTOR MAILADDRESS I PHONE
3 q.9 Vff-
ARCHITECT 1AILADDRE�SS ZIP PHONE' REG.NO.
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER MAILADDMESS ZIP PHONE REG.NOt !::Z
5
MECHANICAL ENGINEER MAILADDRESS ZIP PHONE REG.NO:•
6 O
USE OF BUILDING q
7 CATEGORY: 1 0 2 0
B CLASS OF WORK: O NEW O ADDITION O ALTERATION O REPAIR O GARAGE O OT4EFg
9 DESCRIBE WORK r
TAL OF
1U OCCUPANCY TYPE OF CONST. SO.FEET STORIES
11 NO.OF REQUIRED
ZONING DWELLING UNITS PARKING
12 LOT COVERAGE
13 VALUATION OF WORK$
14 [f SPECIAL-CONDITIONS
PERMIT FEE......................................................................$
PLAN CHECK FEE............................................................$
STATE SURCHARGE........................................................$
SAC CHARGE(UNITS).....................................................$
SEWER..............................................................................$
�/7 s
WATER...............................................................................$
LICENSEFEE....................................................................$ G
OTHER...............................................................................$
PENALTY...........................................................................$
TOTAL FEE PAID...............................................$
RECEIPT NO. DATE 'O
SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL,PLUMBING,HEATING,VEI(TI-
LATING OR AIR CONDITIONING AND FIRE SPRINKLERS.
THIS PERMIT BECOMES NULL AND VOID IF WORK OR CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED
IS NOT COMMENCED WITHIN 180 DAYS, OR IF CONSTRUCTION OR WORK IS SUS-
PENDED OR ABANDONED FOR A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS AT ANY TIME AFTER WORK IS
COMMENCED.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE READ AND EXAMINED THIS APPLICATION AND KNOW
THE SAME TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT.ALL PROVISIONS OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES
GOVERNING THIS TYPE OF WORK WILL OMPLIED WITH WHETHER SPECIFIED
HERIN OR NOT.T OF A P MIT D ES NOT PRESUME TO GIVE AUTHOR•
ITY TO V OR CANCEL E PR ISION OF ANY OTHER STATE OR LOCAL LAW
RE TING CONSTRUC N ORT PER RMANCE OF CONSTRUCTION.
SIG ATURE OF ST;
CT R O AUTHORIZED AGENT (DATE)
SIGN AT RE OF OWNER IF OWNER BUILDER) ( ATE) NOTICE: Do
e Disturb
ERMIT ISSUED
f Vo�
.. Natural DrainageA
BU NG OFFICIAL (DATE)
A a r c h i t e c t s
1501 Washington Ave.S.
Suite#300
Minneapolis, MN 55454
- 612 371-6440 P
612 332-3626 F
jagnes @
collaborativedesigngroup.com
All Welt dasfpm, uwQwmb. plam Lid
spedSmI m k dialed or mMserited by CTB Gzwnp
are a rrd by. asd du pmperV oL Aad'-- .
` were=94 e+rot+red and&-Moped br use m aro
•• ••'1 and m cora edW 110%eye VeDTLOd P IaM MOM
..�..�••�••�••�•• ditu)deA desIM amnaemnds,phm r4
�..e...�.. •• specdmg m stall be used by or dlsdosad b
N
PROPERTY
LINE •••�•• •• any person, m cc-Pmwm for arty pz;-
•—••s.•.= us ..� STAds OP d
Av&AeCm d vAlb hu p
..�..�...�•
EXIT
�..s••�'•� DOOR EXIST. I &da+a ad eaptmce d than msWdkm x
••e••...... •�'• n WOODED EXIST. a 2001Aan ftcb
_ _ --� .REUEf I
Apo%
�• ) 6' HT. PTD. CORDUROY '� (6 Iherebycmtlt tdbsplxr s ed5atlmarmMj
--�-_�--� 12 CONC. BLOCK TRASH 4) • was prepredbymeorude rcydheds�m
r- CHAIN LINK I ENCLOSURE W/'DOUBLEH(2 8' wjTdIanad4moslefWud2act loft
cc FENCE SWING GATE (8) m law d ft stale ce Mtmesoh
EX AREA 5,572 S.F.
`�G ROPOSED (8)
EW BLDG.
_ 7' INL: 1
Da` 63402
ft 9152
I � /Fl\ �v/\ (5) 10 STALLS I g. OVY14R
ASPHALT ( E '
e' VAN I EAST WEST CONSTRUCTION
EXIST. �, 80' RECYLING ` TRANSFORMER H(2 er° (4)
FLOWER 2220 S.F. ��+ erg 24' 18'
SERVICES,INC.
BEDS (5) sIq (7) 66' B(7) D(5 IST.
EXIST.BLDG.
11 STALL COTTO OD
(EXIST.) B(10) 78' WOOD FENCE F(4) GROVE PROJECT
18' 2a' 1 B' S) (1) ') APACHE ANIMAL HOSPITAL
EXIST. SIDEWALK C(4) �(5) MONUMENvf:
•
MONUMENT TO BE REMOVED '^ IN Of EXIST• BRA EDGING W/ROC SIGN
(8) (5) GRAVEL MULCH—TYPICAL �I
SIGN H B(6
• EXISTING PROPERTY UNE •4.
NEW 28' SHDTTITLE
B(4) CURSCUT LANDSCAPE PLAN&SCHEDULES
L-Exisr. COTTONWOOD \--ABANDONED
GROVE CURSCUT
37TH AVE. N. PROJECT N0.
04.02
SC&E
NEWfflLAING SCHEDULE PLANTINGS REMOVED
DATE
NO, COMMON NAME SIZE REMARKS UANTITI' COMMON NAME APPROX.SEZE 04/09/01
ALUE SPRUCE 6--0HT. 8 8 Bit BLUE SPRUCE 30'±gOLDFLAME SPIREA 3 GAL. POTTED2 ASH 3S't
CPRING SNOW FLOWERING CRAB -12'0 B li B2 BLUE SPRUCE 25'+ FOISM��OW.SPIREA 2 GAL POTTED 04/20/01
EARIEGATEDDOGWOOD 3 GAL POTTEDOS/O7/Oi
pISS KIM LILAC 3 GAL POTTED
G 19 MINT JULIP JUNIPER 5 GAL POTTED
F1 3 BURNING BUSH 30' POTTED
1 LANDSCAPE PLAN -
S1ffETN0.
L-1 SCALE r=2f)'-0'
L - 1
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 04/10/02 MEETING DATE: 04/16/02
TO: Planning Commission Members
FROM: Susan Henry, Assistant City Manager 44f—
SUBJECT: Culvers Restaurant- Preliminary Plan Review
Requested Action:
Review the preliminary site plan and concept for Culvers Restaurant.
Background:
The City has been working on an agreement with the owners of Culvers Restaurant
Vadnais Heights to develop the former Hardees site, now city-owned, at 4004 Silver
Lake Road into a Culvers Restaurant for St. Anthony. Culvers representatives have
been negotiating with Exhaust Pros for their site at 4002 Silver Lake Road. Their plan is
to eventually combine the two parcels into one once they close on the Exhaust Pros
property in mid May.
According to the Culvers representatives, the plan is to have the former Hardees site be
where the Culvers Restaurant building resides, while parking would be on the Exhaust
Pros site. The restaurant seating is planned for 120 .people. The proposed hours of
operation are from 10:30 a.m. until 10:30 p.m.
Culvers representatives are aware of the Northwest Quadrant Redevelopment Plan and
have been in communication with Len Pratt. Both.parties agree it is imperative to tie the
new Culvers Restaurant to the redevelopment area.
At this point, Culvers representatives want to share their preliminary plans for the 4000
Block of Silver Lake Road with the Planning Commission on April 16. Culvers
representatives are planning to be back to the May or June Planning Commission
meeting with final development plans and the public hearing.
Attachments:
• Preliminary Site Plan
• Menu
/ I Vle&mel. 4200 Since our first restaurant opened on July 18,1984,in Sauk
City,Wisconsin, Culver's Frozen Custard has earned a
® growing word of mouth reputation for serving quality
America's favorites made fresh® food made fresh. We use fresh,quality ingredients.We America's favorites made fresh®
prepare your meal to order,without cooking ahead.We
keep our restaurant clean,bright and relwung. And we
greet you with a smile and treat you like good neighbors.
.►� � That's why people tell their friends about Culver's.Hope
you enjoy.Come back soon.
America's favorites made fresh® 04
1
i
1,
Shakopee - 952-233-4141
Coon Rapids - 763-780-9585
Savage - 952-736-5970
Elk River - 763-441-0400
�r Navarre - 952-471-7500 .
A Champlin - 763-506-0290
Stillwater - 651-351-2989
fit
, .
Vadnais Heights - 651-762-9600 Our '
is a premium ice cream that we
arfrom fres never- make fresh right here at the restaurant
chuck made to your order like they many times daily so it's always cold,
used to be grilled at hamburger velvety-smooth and delicious.
tJLZ stands in the
1950s.
Open 10:30 am— 10:00 pm Daily
� � � �►
G�� nn 9�
�+OtoCa �iwot Single Double Jumbo
reX!}4iW ane��
W.
Single Double Triple Bacon ButterBurger"'Deluxe ........3.59......4.19
Cake Cone or Dish........... 1.49...... 1.89......2.29 Sourdough Melt..............................3.69......4.29 Shrimp Boat.....................6.79
Waffle Cone...................... 1.89......2.29......2.69 Wisconsin Swiss Melt.....................3.69......4.29 2 pc Norwegian Cod........6.79 y
29 8
Cod C
i
Norwegan o ........ .
- Mushroom&Swiss.........................3.49......4.09 3 pc - -
D/ ButterBurger Deluxe.........2.09......3.09......3.69
2 pc Chicken....................4.29 'e
�� •�Gp ButterBurger Cheese......... 1.89......2.89......3.49 4 pc Chicken....................6.89
ButterBurger Swiss............ 1.89......2.89......3.49
Regula large
ButterBurger..................... 1.69......2.69......3.29
Malts&Shakes...............................2.49......3.49
Concrete Malts&Shakes................2.99......3.99
Basket
Concrete Turtle Malts&Shakes......3.39......4.39
Regular Sundaes.............................2.49 Philly Ribeye Steak.........................3.69......5.69 Grilled Chicken Caesar...................5.29
Grilled Chicken Breast....................3.39......5.39 Chef...............................................4.79
Chicken Tenders.............................3.39......5.39 Taco in the Shell...........................................4.79
Chocolate,Hot Caramel,Mint,Hot Fudge,Butterscotch, Chicken Filet..................................3.39......5.39 Grilled Chicken Cashew...............................5.19
Peanut Butter,Marshmallow,Root Beer,Peach,Blackberry Roast Beef......................................2.99......4.99 Tossed Salad..................................................2.99
Strawberry,Cherry.Blueberry Pineapple,Raspberry.Banana, Stacked Turkey................................2.99 4.99
................................
M&M,Oreo,Snickers.Butterfinger.Heath �.
Grilled Ham&Swiss......................2.99......4.99 /
Pork Tenderloin...............................3.59......5.39 2�/)f✓ /fl
Turkey Sourdough BLT..................3.59......5.59
Norwegian Cod Filet......................3.59......5.59
8 pieces ....................................................... 8.99
Turtle........Ca..............................................3.29 12 pieces....................................................... 11.99
CaramelCashew.......................................3.29 16 pieces....................................................... 14.99
Caramel Apple.....................................3.29 Basket 20 pieces....................................................... 17.99
Banana Fudge Nut............. .3.29 Hot Do 24 pieces.......................................................20.99
••-•--- 2.09......4.09
Chocolate Almond Marshmallow Dog ..........................
Chili Cheese Dog...........................2.39......4.39 p G�1��
3.29 Chili Do or Cheese Do 2.19......4.19 ��r '♦ G IA (/
Dog g...............
_ Strawberry Shortcake......3.29
Brownie Fudge Nut.....3.29I�_�l�ere Regular Large Family
Banana Split..............3.99 011 • �s ButterBurger,Corn Dog.
Hot Dog,Grilled Cheese French Fries...................... 1.29...... 1.59......4.39
r Onion Rin 1.79...................4.49
CheeseButger,Chicken Trnders...............3.59 gr ...............
Includes Jr Frier,Drink Or Milo U Custard Mashed Potatoes............... 1.29......2.59......4.49
6viaaZo Cole Slaw......................... 1.29......2.59......4.49
Q Sea '74� Chili Cheddar Friesies..........2.29...................5.29
Cheese Curds....................2.99...................6.99
i
2.79 4.79 6.99
�ROO�BFEltt Float.............................. 1.99
Cookie Custard Sandwich............................2.29
( *Lemon Ice.................................................. 1.19
Small Medium Large
•': -�
with Fruit.............................................. 1.99 �
Cooler...................................................2.29 ............ 1.09....... 1.29.... 1.49
Smoothie...............................................2.39 Lemonade•Fruit Punch.................1.09....... 1.29.... 1.49
*Available May through September. Coffee,Hot Tea,Milk............................... .89.... 1.09
Hot Chocolate ............................................ 1.09.... 1.39
Rices subject to change
H W ' E S T Q U A D f It:y 1 L_KN t T
.�.. i�. 12 L
tho
ain
OHM ler'
dote
ISSUE NUMBER 2 THE CITY OF ST. ANTHONY APRIL 2002
Q. What is happening with a preliminary site plan and will be appraisal of property to be acquired
the Northwest Quadrant seeking public input into the plan. will need to be completed.
Redevelopment? Q. Does Pratt-Ordway have Q. Will Herberger's remain in the
A. On February 12, the City Council an approved plan for the community and be a part of the
selected Twin Cities metro area redevelopment? new development?
development team Pratt-Ordway as A. No. Although Pratt-Ordway A. It's not know at this time.
the developer for the Northwest presented an initial concept, the Herberger's has been a valuable part
Quadrant. Pratt-Ordway will develop development team will be working of the community for many years and
office/retail and single family housing with St. Anthony officials and the City is committed to working
and has designated Dominium to residents to come up with a with the developer to provide an
develop the multi-family housing for preliminary site plan. That plan must opportunity for Herberger's to stay at
the project. The City expects to enter meet the City's goals and the test of the site. Herberger's would likely be
into a preliminary development both financial and market feasibility located in a new building. Any
agreement with Pratt-Ordway in Pratt-Ordway will have an Open decision to stay or not stay would
April. House on the preliminary site plan have to be made by Herberger's based
Q. Why did the City Council later this year to get public feedback. on its needs and the costs associated
select Pratt-Ordway? Q. My business is in the with being a part of the new
A. The City Council was impressed redevelopment area. When will development.
with the high quality construction, I be contacted by the developer? Q. Can my business remain and
quality of site design, and become a part of the new
q Y g A. Pratt-Ordway will be contacting developwent?
sustainability of Pratt-Ordway individual businesses in the
developments. The City Council had next month to make an initial A. Like Herberger's, other businesses
the opportunity to view metro area introduction. Businesses are also able interested in staying and becoming a
developments of the three competing to contact Pratt-Ordway via e-mail part of the new development will
developers during a bus tour in at info@prattordway.com. need to work directly with the
February. developer to determine the potential
Q. I understand that property
Q. What happens during the appraisals are taking place in the and the costs associated with
preliminary development phase? redevelopment area. What is that remaining.
A. During the preliminary all about? Q. Can you tell me when property
development agreement phase, the A. In order to determine acquisition will occur.
development team and City will qualifications for a tax increment A. An exact schedule is not known at
identify those issues which need to district, property owners in the this time. It likely the City and the
be addressed in the final development redevelopment area may be contacted development team will enter into a
agreement phase and develop the by an appraiser hired by the City. The final development agreement late in
framework for addressing them. appraiser will do a quick visual 2002. Acquisition of land is unlikely
Those issues typically include inspection of the outside of business to occur until the final development
financing, necessary land use and residential properties in the agreement phase of the project.
approvals, process, schedule and redevelopment area. This appraisal is However, it is not yet known whether
timing. During the preliminary separate from any property acquisition will begin late in 2002 or
development agreement phase the acquisition process, which occurs in 2003.
development team will also work on later. At that time, a more detailed
CITY OF ST.ANTHONY Northwest Quadrant Redevelopment Business Update APRIL 2002
Q. Why is it a more definite Q. Will the City use condemnation preliminary site plan, once Pratt-
schedule isn't available for this to acquire properties in the Ordway has worked with the City to
redevelopment? redevelopment area? develop that plan. That Open House
A. Redevelopment is a complex A. The City will encourage voluntary is likely to occur late in 2002.
process that requires the successful agreements with property owners. Q. How can I stay informed about
completion and coordination of a If an agreement cannot be reached what is happening with the
variety of issues including land use and mediation is unsuccessful, the Northwest Quadrant
approvals, financing, process, and City will,as a last resort, consider Redevelopment?
timing. The preliminary development condemnation to acquire properties. A. Pratt-Ordway will be in contact
phase when all the issues are As a general rule,most redevelopment with businesses in the redevelopment
identified will not begin until acquisitions are accomplished through area. However, you may contact
sometime in April, so it is still voluntary sales. Pratt-Ordway via e-mail at:
very early- Q. When should I begin to look for info@prattordway.com. The City
Q. If my property is acquired, am I new locations for my business? will continue to provide updates
guaranteed to receive fair market on the Northwest Quadrant
A. It is always good to be aware of
value for my property? redevelopment project in the
options, however at this time it is still Village Notes, the City's website
A. Yes. The Uniform Relocation uncertain when acquisition would v 1,ci.Notes,
the City's we s, and
Assistance Act guarantees that occur. It is also important to note that through periodic issues of this
property owners must receive fair while businesses are free to relocate at redevelopment newsletter. For more
market value for the property- That any time, those that relocate ahead of information, you may also contact the
act, which dictates the acquisition the redevelopment process may lose City offices at you
may
also c , or for
process to cities, also ensures a fair their chance to obtain relocation general updates call the Hotline f
and satisfactory amount of time to assistance. Relocation assistance is 6 neral -1350.
complete acquisition and relocation. funding provided under the Uniform
Q. Typically, how does the purchase Relocation Assistance Act to cover
�MM WN W41
o errocess work? moving costs.
p April 2002 Preliminary development
A. Typically, developers will make a
Q. provide
I have any chance to agreement
input or feedback to g reement entered
purchase offer to you for your Prattinpy's plan for the Late 2002 Final development
property based on a professional redevelopment area? agreement entered
appraisal that they have received. 2003 Acquisition,relocation,
Property owners have a period of A. Yes. All businesses in the demolition
time to consider the offer. redevelopment area will be invited to 2003 or 2004 Construction begins
the Open House on a draft
snvwv(u0y7uo-)s-u eut x
1888-68L-ZI9
811,99 NW'6uogiutl IS
peoJI a-rl 13AIIS t0££
Ivo �u
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2
3 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
4
5 March 26, 2002
6
7 CALL TO ORDER
8 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
9
10 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. -
11 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks invited the Council and audience to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance.
12
13 ROLL CALL.
14 Present: Mayor Pro Tem Sparks; Councilmembers Horst, Thuesen, and Faust.
15 Absent: Mayor Hodson.
16 Also Present:. City Manager Mike Mornson.
17
18 CONSIDERATION,DISCUSSION,AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ALL OF THE FOLLOWING
19 ITEMS.
20
21 I. APPROVAL OF MARCH 26,2002 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA.
22 Motion by Councilmember Faust, second by Councilmember Horst, to approve the City Council
23 Meeting Agenda of March 26, 2002.
24
25 Motion carried unanimously.
26
27 II. PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS.
28 None.
29
30 III. COMMUNITY FORUM.
31 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks invited residents to come forward at this time and address the Council on
32 items that are not on the regular agenda.
33
34 Hearing none,Mayor Pro Tem Sparks moved forward with the agenda.
35
36 IV. CONSENT AGENDA.
37
38 1. Consider March 12, 2002 Council meeting minutes.
39 2. Consider licenses and permits.
40 3. Consider payment of claims.
41
42 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, second by Councilmember Faust, to approve the Consent
43 Agenda.
44
45 Motion carried unanimously.
46
1 V. PUBLIC.HEARINGS.
2 A. Resolution 02-033, re: Consider approval Central Park Outdoor Recreation Grant
3 Application. (Todd Hubmer,WSB, Inc.,will be present)
4 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks opened the public hearing opened at 7:02 p.m.
5
6 Hubmer indicated that he had distributed a draft copy of the Outdoor Recreation Grant
7 Application to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)requesting
8 funding assistance in the amount of$75,000 for the Central Park Multipurpose Field
9 Redevelopment Project. He added that the application would be submitted to the DNR
10 by March 31, 2002.
11
12 Hubmer indicated that the DNR will determine grant awards in May or June of 2002. He
13 stated that,if contracts could be executed quickly, the City may be eligible to use existing
14 funds from the Central Park Redevelopment Project as matching funds for the grant.
15
16 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks closed the public hearing closed at 7:05 p.m.
17
18 Motion by Councilmember Thuesen, second by Councilmember Horst,to adopt
19 Resolution 02-033, re: Consider approval of Central Park Outdoor Recreation Grant
20 Application.
21
22 Motion carried unanimously.
23
24 VI. REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONS AND STAFF. .
25 A. Presentation of Finance 2001 Annual Report. (Roger Larson, Director of Finance,will be
26 preseno
27 Roger Larson came forward to present the Council with the.2001 Finance Annual Report.
28
29 Larson indicated that the Finance Department is comprised of five employees: the
30 Finance Director, a receptionist, a utility building clerk, an accounting technician, and a
31 part-time accounting clerk.
32
33
34 o Utility billing
35 o License/Permits
36 o Customer service
37 o Answer phones/Direct calls
38 o Community Center reservations
39
40
41 • Accounting/Record keeping
42 • Budgeting
43 • Payroll
44 • Financial Services/Departments
45 • Performance Rating- 9 to 1
46 Excellent/Very Good
47
48 IMPROVEMENTS IN SERVICES
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
March 26,2002
Page 3
1 • Utility Payments (New Program)
2 o Automated Payments
3 Checking/Savings
4 50 Households participating
5 • Drop boxes at Cub Foods
6 • Scanning Equipment
7 o Scan payments in our computer system
8 • Upgrading Mater Reading Card Systems
9
10 SERVICES TO EMPLOYEES
11 • Automatic Deposit of payroll checks
12 • Organization of a new Dental Plan
13 • Training/Education
14 o On-going at all levels
15 • Network Computer System
16
17 BUDGET CONCERNS
18 • State Budget Cuts
19 o HACA- Eliminated
20 o Potential loss of LGA
21 o Recovery of HACA Increased Levy
22
23 DECLINING REVENUE SOURCES
24 • User fees
25 • Increase levy
26 • Budget cuts
27 o Reduction in service levels
28
29 CHALLENGES FOR THE FUTURE
30 Current Level of Service
31 • Maintain our current level of service
32 o Police "
33 o Fire
34 o Public Works
35
36 • Community Survey?
37 o 70% Oppose Reduction in City Services
38 o 62% Favor a Tax Increase to Maintain our Present Level of Service
39
40 WHERE WILL WE NEED FUTURE RESOURCES?
41 • Apache Mall
42 • 100-year Flood Protection
43 • Road Improvements
44 • Parks and Recreation
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
March 26,2002
Page 4
1 • Tax Increment Finance
2 • DNR Improvement Bonds
3 • Special Assessments
.4 • User Fees
5
6 OTHER CAPITAL PROJECTS
7 • Park Improvements
8 o Central and Silver Point
9 • City Hall
10 o Upgrades/Renovation
11 • AudioNisual
12 o Sound System upgrades
13
14 BUILDING NEEDS/NEW FACILTIES
15 • Fire Station
16 o Strong community support
17 o Comfort level in the community to increase taxes to support a new fire
18 station
19 • Public Works
20 o Community support
21 o Comfort level to increase taxes
22
23 TAX INCREASE FOR FACILITY NEEDS
24 o Comfort Level= $26.60 per year
25 o Referendum?
26
27 Councilmember Sparks inquired as to whether the comfort level amount of money was
28 significant, or not. Larson responded that the$26.60 would be on the low-end in terns
29 of meeting financial needs. He stated that a more realistic dollar amount would be
30 $75.00-$100.00.
31
32 FUNDING SOURCE/LIQUOR 1?ROFITS -
33 o Significance are the solid increases from 1997 through 2001.
34
35 GASB-34
36 • Requires Capital Assets be reported with accumulated depreciation
37 o Buildings/Automobiles/Computer Equipment
38 • Infrastructure Assets must be depreciated
39 o Water towers/Roads/Strom Sewer Lines
40 • Implementation
41 o Budgets under$10 million
42 o Fiscal years after 6-15-03
43 • Cost- $10,000-$15,000
44
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2002
Page 5
1 CREDIT RATING IS A-1
2 • Lower interest rates
3
4 INVESTMENTS-FIXED RATE OF RETRUN
5 • Hold till maturity
6 o 100%of principal is returned
7 o Interest earnings are at a fixed percentage
8
9 • Subject to market conditions
10 o Liquidated or sold before maturity
11 o Penalty for early withdrawal
12 o Sale could result in gain/loss of principal
13
14 GOVERNED BY STATE STATUTES
15 • Types of Instruments
16 o Certificate of deposits
17 o Commercial paper
18 o Zero coupon bonds
19 o FNMA's
20 o Federal Home Loan Mortgage
21
22 INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO
23 • September I Vh
24 o Uncertain Stock Market
25 o Market conditions favor investments with fixed earnings
26 • Value of portfolio-December 31St
27 o $11,411,258 Market Value
28 o $11,444,619 Book Value
29 o ($33,361)
30
31 RATE OF RETURN OF PORTFOLIO
32 • Ehlers- Independent Review
33 • Rate of Return
34 o Average Rate of Return was 1.08%higher
35 • Unrealized Loss
36 o The ratio of Market Value o Book Value is very low
37
38 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks commended Larson on his excellent presentation.
39
40 Councilmember Horst inquired about the overall portfolio, and where the $1,300,000 for
41 the redevelopment of the parks was coming from. Larson stated that, presently, the city
42 still has the money. He stated that the value of the investment portfolio will begin going
43 down, once the project is well underway.
44
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
March 26,2002
Page 6
1 Councilmember Thuesen asked if Larson was confident that the other large capital
2 improvement projects that are ahead of them(fire station and public works) could happen
3 while the city still maintained their A-1 credit rating, and their course of conservative
4 financial strategies. Larson stated that they are in a position at this time where they really
5 need to hold still. He added that it may come to be a referendum.
6
7 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks asked where the$11 million that they have in their investment
8 portfolio came from. Larson stated that it is there from the different bond sales that they
9 have had from their Tax Increment Districts, and the Water Filtration money($5.5
10 million) is included in the $11 million. He added that it is built up over years.
11
12 B. Presentation of Public Works 2001 Annual Report. (Jay Hartman, Director of Public
13 Works, will be present.
14 Jay Hartman came forward to present a the Council with a brief overview of the Public
15 Works Department covering all of the divisions of the Public Works Department.
16
17 Hartman stated that the Public Works Department is comprised of twelve employees. He
18 sated that the department is responsible for the maintenance and repair of all city
19 buildings, city property and city infrastructure. Hartman indicated that the Public Works
20 Department could be broken down into four departments: vehicle maintenance, street
21 maintenance,parks department, and water/sewer department.
22
23 Hartman stated that the Vehicle Maintenance Department is responsible for the
24 maintenance and repair of all city vehicles, including fire and police vehicles. He
25 indicated that the goal of the Vehicle Maintenance Department is to provide a service in a
26 manner that is competitive,with outside service alternatives.
27
28 Hartman stated that the Street Maintenance Department provides maintenance and repair
29 to all city roadways, alleys, and city-owned parking lots. He indicated that the
30 department is responsible for maintaining approximately twenty-four miles of roadway.
31 He stated that the maintenance includes snow removal,crack filling,joint sealing, ice
32 control, crack-sealing, and street sweeping.
33 -
34 Hartman stated that, with reference to snow removal and ice control, the goal of the
35 Street Maintenance Department is to complete all primary and secondary roads within a
36 six-hour timeframe. He stated that they responded to seven full snow events in 2001,
37 using six hundred-fifty tons of salt/sand to provide ice control.
38
39 Hartman stated that the goal of the crack filling and joint sealing is to accomplish 1/5 of
40 the city per year, for a five-year total goal.
41
42 Hartman stated that the spring street sweeping is performed six to seven times per year,
43 and begins around April 1, and continues through the fall.
44
45 Hartman indicated that street striping occurs every year.
46
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2002
Page 7
1 Hartman stated that boulevard tree trimming and tree replacement on a yearly basis, and
2 is performed by licensed tree inspectors on the Public Works Department staff.
3
4 Hartman stated that the Street Reconstruction Program has been quite a success.
5
6 Hartman reviewed the Parks Department,which provides the maintenance and repair of
7 all city parks and park structures:
8
9 PARKS DEPARTMENT
10 City Parks:
11 o Emerald Park
12 o Central Park
13 o Tower Park
14 o Silver point Park
15 o Trillium Park
16 Retention Ponds
17
18 WATER/SEWER DEPARTMENT
19 2001 Goals that were set and accomplished:
20 o Sewer Jetted Sanitary sewer system and inspected manholes
21 o Provide residents with Annual CCR Report
22 o Update utility maps and water/sewer maps
23 o Water meter replacement
24 o Inspect for non-conforming Sump Pump.Discharge
25 o Annual hydrant flushing
26
27 Capital Improvements for 2002:
28 o Equipment upgrades at Water Filtration Plant
29 o Upgrade Well House#4
30 o Completion of a Well-head Protection Plan
31
32 Hartman stated that there is an obvious need to upgrade the Public Works facility. He
33 stated.that there are building deficiencies, a lack of storage space, and an inability to hire
34 and retain employees due to the condition of the facility.
35
36 In conclusion,Hartman stated that 2001 was a productive year, as they maintained the
37 goals within each department, and provide the necessary service to the residents.
38
39 Hartman added that he attributes a lot of the success to the employees that work within
40 the Public Works department.
41
42 Hartman stated that the mission of the Public Works Department is to not only meet, but
43 exceed, the level of other Public Works Agencies.
44
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2002
Page 8
1 Councilmember Thuesen stated that he was happy to hear that the Public Works
2 Department was looking to ways to better meet the needs of some of the small retention
3 ponds on the south-end of the city.
4
5 Councilmember Horst asked about cutting costs by out-sourcing some of the services.
6 Hartman stated that there is not anything at this time that they are looking to out-source.
7
8 Councilmember Faust applauded Hartman and his employees for their can-do attitudes,
9 the ability to go the extra mile, and their assistance to other departments when needed.
10
11 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks stated that Hartman's presentation was a nice reminder of all of
12 the services that their tax dollars pay for.
13
14 VII. GENERAL POLICY BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL.
15
16 VIII. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER AND COUNCILMEMBERS.
17 Mornson provided the Council with a bonding update. He indicated that they were trying to
18 move the money over from the house side to the senate side. He indicated that they look very
19 good at this bonding session, and that they are shooting for$2 million, and need at least
20 $250,000 in order to finish Silver Point Park.
21
22 A. North Metro Mayors-rescheduled for April 9, 2002 City Council meeting.
23
24 B. Barbershop lease(by fire station).
25
26 C. Security doors by police area.
27
28 Mornson stated that, due to the ongoing vandalism of the public restrooms located in the
29 Community Center,Hartman was requesting Finance to support the installation of double doors
30 to be located in the rear hallway next to the Police Department.
31
32 Mornson added that the City Hall cleaning service has also requested this improvement to
33 increase the security and safety of their cleaning personnel. -
34
35 Mornson asked for Hartman's opinion on the subject.
36
37 Hartman stated that it appears that the current doors are secure,but stated that they are not. He
38 stated that the vandalism would be less, if the installed doors had set hours during which they
39 were unlocked.
40
41 Hartman stated that it is an on-going problem, and asked for the Council's consideration.
42
43 Councilmember Thuesen indicated that there have been times in the past year or two where the
44 door has been propped open past the hour of 4:30 p.m.
45
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
March 26,2002
Page 9
1 Councilmember Horst asked exactly which entrances are being discussed. Hartman stated that
2 he was asking them to consider a set of double doors located between the foyer area and the
3 police hallway.
4
5 Councilmember Horst asked if the police use the doors to the outside at other times. Police
6 Chief Engstrom stated that customers use it, and the police department buzzes them in.
7
8 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks stated that she did not understand how the proposed doors would make a
9 difference, if people were stilled allowed to enter through the front of the building. Hartman
10 indicated that it might not be an end-all,but would likely reduce the ability to exit the building.
11
12 Hartman stated that he would like to look at some different alternatives, and come back to the
13 Council with more information.
14
15 Councilmember Horst stated that they needed to react to the vandalism that is coming from
16 within the community.
17
18 Councilmember Faust stated that he felt that, if there was a problem, they needed to fix it. He
19 added that he was not sure the solution solved the problem.
20
21 D. Culver's update- came to a verbal agreement with Exhaust Pro. Currently working on an
22 inspection of both facilities with an engineer for TIF purposes.
23
24 E. Northwest Quadrant-bi-weekly meetings are taking place between the involved parties.
25 Next steps for Council: Jim Prosser present at next City Council study session to review the
26 Development Agreement that is being negotiated.
27
28 F. April schedule:
29 April 2 Council Work Session
30 April 9 Council meeting
31 April 17 Chamber of Commerce annual meeting
32 April 23 Council meeting
33 April 26 Volunteer Dinner -
34 April 30 Joint meeting with the school
35
36 Lastly, Mornson highlighted a withdrawal request for a conditional use permit for the candle
37 manufacturer on 37'h Avenue.
38
39 Councilmembers Horst and Thuesen indicated that they had nothing to report this evening.
40
41 Councilmember Faust stated that he felt that the bonding bill would come out to their advantage.
42
43 Councilmember Faust stated that one thing that has made this city strong in the past has been the
44 city policing. He urged residents to continue to do so, and to report any suspicions to the Police
45 Department.
46
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
March 26, 2002
Page 10
1 Mayor Pro Tem Sparks indicated that Villagefest has been cancelled for this summer due to the
2 parks project. She added that the group decided to focus their efforts on a big blast for 2003.
3
4 . IX. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.
5 None.
6
7 X. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENTS.
8 None.
9
10 XI. ADJOURNMENT.
11 Motion by Councilmember Horst, second by Councilmember Thuesen, to adjourn the meeting at
12 8:25 p.m.
13
14 Motion carried unanimously.
15
16 Respectfully submitted,
17
18
19 Courtney Seesz
20 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
21
. 22 Mayor
23
24 ATTEST:
25 City Clerk
26