HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL PACKET 05202003 Meeting Sheet
IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIIIIIII
102896
BOX: 27
Folder: PL PACKETS 2000-2004
Document: PL PACKET 05202003 '
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
MAY 20, 2003
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. -
S. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
6. MEETING MINUTES
6.1 Review and Approve Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2003
7. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL
7.1 Designate a Planning Commission Member to the May 27, 2003 City Council Meeting
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.1 Amend the Zoning Code to Allow Pawnbrokers and Secondhand Dealers as Conditional
Uses in Commercial Districts
8.2 Amend Zoning Code to Allow Adult Day Care Centers as Conditional Uses in
Commercial Districts
9. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS
11. ADJOURNMENT
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2
3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
4
5 April 15, 2003
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, Hoska,
17 and Stromgren.
18 Absent: Commissioners Steeves and Tillman.
19 Also present: Assistant City Manager Susan Hall.
20
21 IV. PUBLIC INPUT.
22 Hearing no comments, Chair Melsha moved forward with the agenda.
23
24 V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
25 Motion by Vice Chair Stille, second by Commissioner Stromgren, to approve the meeting
26 agenda.
27
28 Motion carried unanimously.
29
30 VI. MEETING MINUTES,
31 6.1 Review and Approve Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 18, 2003.
32 Motion by Chair Melsha, second by Commissioner Hanson, to approve the Planning
33 Commission meeting minutes of March 18, 2003 as presented.
34
35 Motion carried unanimously.
36
37 VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
38 8.1 Adoption of Ordinances Regulating Pawnbrokers and Secondhand Dealers within the
39 Lim
40 Chair Melsha opened the public hearing at 7:02 p.m.
41
42 Ms. Hall noted that over the past several months, Planning Commissioners have studied and
43 discussed the newly drafted secondhand dealers and pawnbrokers ordinances. In March,
44 Commissioners decided that the ordinances are in final form and ready for public hearing/City
45 Council recommendation.
46
47 Ms. Hall explained that most ordinances do not require a public hearing. Thus, a public hearing
48 is not required prior to the passage of the pawnbroker and secondhand dealer ordinances.
49 However, a city may choose to have a public hearing, upon whatever notice the city deems
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 15, 2003
Page 2
1 appropriate. In this case, the City is holding a public hearing as a courtesy.
2
3 Ms. Hall noted that a public hearing will be necessary next month at the Planning Commission
4 level to amend the City's Zoning Code to allow for pawnbrokers and secondhand dealers to
5 operate as a conditional use in commercial districts within the City. It is necessary because, for
6 example, the City would not pass an ordinance allowing pawnbrokers as a conditional use
7 without guidelines in place in Section 566 to regulate pawnbrokers.
8
9 Ms. Hall advised that staff recommends two actions: (1) The Planning Commission should take
10 public comment on the subject ordinances and then refer them onto the City Council as
11 recommended adoption; and(2) The Planning Commission should call for a public hearing on
12 May 20, to amend the City's Zoning Code to allow for pawnbrokers and secondhand dealers to
13 operate as a conditional use in commercial districts. The recommended ordinances and Zoning
14 Code amendment will be considered by the City Council on May 27, 2003.
15
16 Chair Melsha stated that he would like to incorporate the information from the March 18, 2003
17 Planning Commission Meeting, particularly Item 8.1, including Captain John Ohl's comments
18 and recommendations.
19
20 Chair Melsha asked for any further comment for the public hearing. Hearing none, he closed the
21 public hearing at 7:05 p.m.
22
23 Chair Melsha mentioned that the City Attorney recommended keeping the licensing fees and
24 investigation fees in a separate statute and that issue will be discussed in May.
25
26 Motion by Chair Melsha, seconded by Vice Chair Stille, to recommend adoption of what is
27 going to be the new Chapter 565 regarding secondhand dealers based on the findings that are set
28 forth in the draft ordinance at section 565.01, to call for a public hearing on May 20, 2003 to
29 amend the City's Zoning Code to allow for secondhand dealers to operate as a conditional use in
30 commercial districts.
31
32 Motion carried unanimously.
33
34 Motion by Chair Melsha, seconded by Vice Chair Stille, to recommend Chapter 566, the
35 pawnbroker ordinance, based on the findings found at 566.01, to call for a public hearing on
36 May 20, 2003 to amend the City's Zoning Code to allow for pawnbrokers to operate as a
37 conditional use in commercial districts.
38
39 Motion carried unanimously.
40
41 It was noted that the recommended ordinances and Zoning Code amendment would be
42 considered by the City Council on May 27, 2003.
43
44 IX. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION.
45 9.1 Discuss Potential Adult Day Care Amendment to Zoning Ordinance.
46 Ms. Hall explained that with three Planning Commissioners absent at the March meeting, the
47 Chair decided to defer this issue one more month to get input from all Commissioners. She
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 15, 2003
Page 3
1 noted the research information that had been included with the March Planning Commission
2 packet for discussion purposes.
3
4 Ms. Hall advised that one of the key discussion points in March was where should the adult
5 daycare be permitted (commercially-zoned areas only, etc.). Also, the other discussion pertained
6 to how the City should implement this change in the zoning ordinance (should it be a conditional
7 use permit, etc.). Some discussion ensued about comparing adult daycare with child daycare,
8 which is currently permitted in the City. Loading/unloading was also discussed.
9
10 Ms. Hall asked the Planning Commission to discuss the potential amendment to the zoning code.
11 She advised that the next step is to call for a public hearing at the May 20 meeting, with -
12 recommendation going to the City Council on the issue May 27,with three readings necessary,
13 on May 27th with two in June. Ms. Hall mentioned that the applicant would like a projected
14 schedule.
15
16 Chair Melsha asked for clarification of the comment by Ms. Hall regarding the City Attorney's
17 request for what this may look like. Ms. Hall stated the request was for how it was incorporated
18 into the ordinance, were the conditions actually in the ordinance or would it be a conditional use
19 permit. Chair Melsha commented that the Commission likes the Golden Valley Ordinance
20 example.
21
22 Vice Chair Stille asked where the interested party was planning to put an adult day care. Ms.
23 Hall stated that the proposed site was on the 2500 Block of Highway 88,near the Hitching Post.
24
25 Chair Melsha suggested the Planning Commission discuss whether this should be a permitted
26 use or a conditional use permit. Chair Melsha noted that Commissioner Tillman makes the point
27 that daycare already is permitted, so this to should be a permitted use.
28
29 Vice Chair Stille explained that a conditional use permit lets the Commission tailor things for a
30 specific site. He stated that he was leaning towards a conditional use permit process.
31
32 Commissioner Hanson concurred commenting that one issue that was brought up was the first
33 floor and fire safety issues. Commissioner Stromgren suggested those issues would be covered
34 under the fire code.
35
36 Commissioner Hoska said that the biggest difference he sees between an adult day care and a
37 child day care is the fact that many of the adults would be confined to wheel chairs. Chair
38 Melsha stated that many of the users would be brought to the adult day care by Metro Mobility.
39
40 Vice Chair Stille asked about what zoning districts an adult day care could be used in. He asked
41 which zone Northgate was in. Ms. Hall stated that Northgate was in a commercial zone.
42
43 Commissioner Stromgren asked if adult day care zoning included multiple family zones. Chair
44 Melsha stated adult day care was already permitted in residential zones.
45
46 Ms. Hall commented that it might not be as appropriate in light industrial as it would be in
47 commercial areas.
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 15, 2003
Page 4
1 Chair Melsha suggested that the Commission keep adult daycare limited to commercial zoning
2 districts. He asked about the parking requirements for commercial property. Ms. Hall stated
3 there would probably be less parking because of the drop off situation. Ms. Hall suggested there
4 probably would not be large parking requirements for twenty adults,just staff parking mostly.
5
6 Vice Chair Stille commented that in a multi-family zone, 13 to 16 people are the maximum
7 allowed.
8
9 Chair Melsha stated the Planning Commission could go with a conditional use in a commercial
10 zone only, with the two subject conditions being loading/drop off setup and also the parking.
1 1 Chair Melsha stated the Golden Valley Ordinance actually says one space for each five cared for,
12 plus one space for each employee. He suggested a conditional use permit be used based upon
13 the number cared for within the facility.
14
15 Vice Chair Stille commented that it would be hard if there already was a parking ordinance and
16 that it may be better to leave the parking ordinance alone.
17
18 Ms. Hall suggested the Planning Commission use the sample conditional use permit from
19 Golden Valley. Chair Melsha agreed.
20
21 Chair Melsha asked for further comments. Hearing none, he suggested that they plan to have the
22 matter heard in May.
23
24 Ms. Hall stated that she didn't think the applicant would be able to apply for a conditional use
25 permit until July.
26
27 Chair Melsha asked what was done in the past with the Council. Councilmember Thuesen spoke
28 from the audience and explained that this varies depending on the request.
29
30 Ms. Hall explained that the applicant came in January so he has been waiting and that he has an
31 application with the State that is currently pending.
32
33 Chair Melsha commented that at this point the process cannot go much faster. He suggested the
34 applicant attend the public hearing. Ms. Hall stated she would advise the applicant to attend.
35
36 9.2 Northwest Quadrant/Apache Redevelopment.
37 Ms. Hall stated that the tentative Northwest Quadrant schedule would include April 22, 2003 the
38 Resolution calling for hearing on TIF will be heard, along with the Resolution on environmental
39 grant for asbestos. On June 3 the Joint City Council/Planning Commission may have a Work
40 Session. Ms. Hall stated that on June 17 the Planning Commission will review the PUD and TIF
41 issues and on June 24 the City Council will review the PUD and TIF plans, possible resolution
42 on livable communities grant,possible TIF hearing and possible adoption of the TIF plan. Ms.
43 Hall stated that on July 15 the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on PUD
44 application, here there will be a phased addition laid out, and then on July 22 the City Council
45 will hear PUD and Developer Agreement approvals and hold a public hearing on the TIF plan
46 and then the City process will be done and the plans will be good to go. Ms. Hall stated it was in
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
April 15, 2003
Page 5
1 the best interest of the developer to get going also, but indicated there are many complications at
2 this time.
3
4 Ms. Hall proceeded to explain that the Mayor had a blue ribbon panel to fill some of the gaps to
5 the development and there were many innovative, creative ideas being considered. Ms. Hall
6 used the example of doing something innovative with transportation and also mentioned that a
7 panel was considering telecommuting issues. Ms. Hall explained that this panel will meet for
8 two or three months and includes metro people and St. Anthony residents. Ms. Hall stated that
9 the whole process was being watched all over the as a model area for redevelopment.
10
1 1 Chair Melsha introduced Councilmember Thuesen and asked him to come to the podium.
12
13 Councilmember Thuesen stated that he was happy to be the Council Liaison this year and would
14 be glad to attend any meetings that the commission felt would be helpful. Councilmember
15 Thuesen commented that it comes down to knocking on enough doors to get money and
16 expertise for the redevelopment. Councilmember Thuesen stated there are some heavy hitters on
17 the panel. He stated telebusiness was talked about. He noted he felt good about the process and
18 was sure that positive things would come out of the process.
19
20 Councilmember Thuesen stated the residents need to realize that hard work has gone into this
21 project by the City Council and City staff. He stated the developer has a bottom line and the city
22 has a bottom line and that hopefully they can find a place to meet in the middle. Councilmember
23 Thuesen asked for any questions.
24
25 Chair Melsha thanked Councilmember Thuesen for attending and for his report.
26
27 X. ANNOUNCEMENTS.
28 Commissioner Hoska mentioned that the new Culvers just opened and business was busy so far.
29
30 Ms. Hall stated that LaNel Financial was not going to acquire the property on Lowry and that in
31 either May or June they will be coming with their request for a 34 unit building.
32
33 VII. COMMUNICATION WITH CITY COUNCIL.
34 7.1 Designate a Planninp, Commission Member to the April 22, 2003 City Council Meeting.
35 Chair Melsha indicated he would wait to hear from staff or the Council Liaison before assigning
36 a Commissioner to attend the April 22, 2003 City Council meeting. Vice Chair Stille noted he
37 would be happy to attend if needed.
38
39 XI. ADJOURNMENT.
40 Motion by Commissioner Hanson, second by Vice Chair Stille, to adjourn the meeting at 7:37
41 p.m.
42
43 Motion carried unanimously.
44
45 Respectfully submitted,
46 Sandra Miller
47 Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 5/13/03 . MEETING DATE: 5/20/03
TO: Chair Melsha & Planning Commission Members
FROM: Susan M.H. Hall, Assistant City Manager
kAf-
SUBJECT: Pawnbrokers/Secondhand Dealers
Overview:
On May 20, 2003, the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to amend Section
1635.03 of the City's Zoning Code to allow for pawnbrokers and secondhand dealers to
operate as a conditional use in Commercial districts within the City. This is necessary
because, for example, you would not pass an ordinance allowing pawnbrokers as a
conditional use without guidelines in place in Section 566 to regulate pawnbrokers.
In regard to the pawnshop and secondhand good ordinance, the City will also need to
amend Chapter 6 of the City Code relating to fees. Both the pawnbroker and
secondhand dealer ordinance reference Section 615 of the City Code as establishing an
investigation fee and license fee. Attached is a proposed ordinance amending 615,
which establishes such fees. It' is not necessary for the Planning Commission to
consider this ordinance, as it is not a zoning matter: However to be complete, the
Planning Commission should propose the fee ordinance and forward it onto the City
Council.
At the April 15, 2003, Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held on the
pawnbrokers and secondhand dealers ordinances. There was no public comment at the
public hearing.
In total, there are four proposed ordinances coming from the Planning Commission: (1)
the pawnbroker ordinance; (2) secondhand goods ordinance; (3) the zoning code
amendment; and the license fee amendment.
Requested Action:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take public comment on the zoning
amendment and then refer it onto the City Council as recommended adoption. In a
separate motion, the Planning Commission should review and recommend the license
fee ordinance to the City Council. The recommended ordinances, zoning code
amendment, and fees will be considered by the City Council on May 27.
Attachments:
• Zoning code amendment
• License fee amendment
CITY OF ST.ANTHONY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1635.03 OF THE ZONING CODE
TO ALLOW PAWNBROKERS AND SECONDHAND DEALERS
AS CONDITIONAL USES IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
ORDINANCE NO.
The City Council of the City of St.Anthony hereby ordains:
SECTION 1. Section 1635.03 of the City's Zoning Code is amended to add the
following uses as permitted conditional uses within a general commercial district(C District):
(x) Secondhand Dealers that comply with the requirements of Section 565.
(w) Pawnbroker businesses which comply with the requirements of Section 566.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect following a duly noticed
public hearing by the Planning Commission, upon passage by the City Council and publication
in the City's official newspaper.
Adopted this day of 12003.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Publication of Notice of Public Hearing:
Planning Commission Public Hearing: May 20, 2003
Passage by City Council:
Publication in St. Anthony Bulletin:
CITY OF ST.ANTHONY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6 OF THE ST.ANTHONY CITY CODE;
ESTABLISHING FEES FOR THE INVESTIGATION AND LICENSING
OF PAWNBROKERS AND SECONDHAND DEALERS
ORDINANCE NO.
The City Council of the City of St.Anthony hereby ordains:
SECTION 1. The current provisions in Section 615.06 (Other License Fees) of the St.
Anthony City Code relating to Secondhand Dealers are hereby repealed and superceded by the
provisions of Section 2 of this ordinance as set forth below.
SECTION 2. Section 615.06 of the City Code is amended to establish investigation and
licensing fees for Pawnbrokers and Secondhand Dealers in the City that comply with Sections
565 and 566 of the City Code:
Minnesota Applicable
License Fee Term Transferable Statutes Code Section
Pawnbroker $5000 License Fee One year; No 566
$750 Investigation Fee Expires 12/31
of each year
Secondhand $5000 License Fee One year; No 565
Dealer $750 Investigation Fee Expires 12/31
of each year
SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon passage by the City
Council and publication of the Ordinance in the City's official newspaper.
Adopted this day of , 2003..
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Passage by City Council:
Publication in St. Anthony Bulletin:
MEMORANDUM
DATE: 5/13/03 MEETING DATE: 5/20/03
TO: Chair Melsha & Planning Commission Members
FROM: Susan M.H. Hall, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Adult Day Care
Overview:
For the last couple of months, Planning Commissioners have been discussing the adult
day care use request. Last month, Commissioners agreed to recommend the use as a
conditional use permit in the Commercial zoning district. On May 20, 2003, the Planning
Commission will hold a public hearing amending Section 1635.03 of the zoning code to
allow adult day care centers as conditional uses in the Commercial zoning district.
The City Attorney's office has reviewed the statutes and state rule regulating adult day
care centers. The Minnesota Department of Human Services licenses such centers. The
state rules establish a number of regulations governing adult day care centers to protect
the safety and welfare of program participants. In addition, it is not necessary for the
City to pass an ordinance regulating adult day care centers as state law sufficiently
covers the area. Thus, in the proposed ordinance, adult day care centers are limited to
those centers that are licensed under state laws and rules.
Requested Action:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take public comment on the zoning
amendment and then refer it onto the City Council as recommended action. The
recommendation will be considered by the City Council on May 27.
Attachment:
• Adult Day Care amendment
05/02/03 FRI 11:21 FAX 6123402643 Q1004
CITY OF ST.ANTHONY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1635.03 OF THE ZONING
CODE TO ALLOW ADULT DAY CARE CENTERS AS
CONDITIONAL USES IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
ORDINANCE NO.
The City Council of the City of St.Anthony hereby ordains:
SECTION 1. Section 1635.03 of the City's Zoning Code is amended to add the
following use as a permitted conditional,use within a general commercial district (C District):
(y) Adult Day Care Centers, licensed under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 245A and
Minnesota Rules, Sections 9555.9600 to 9555.9730.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect following a duly noticed
public hearing by the Planning Commission,upon passage by the City Council and publication
in the City's official newspaper.
Adopted this day of 72003.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Publication of Notice of Public hearing:
Planning Commission Public Hearing: May 20,2003
Passage by City Council:
Publication in St. Anthony Bulletin:
. ah- theen
llla
2003
Tentative Northwest Quadrant Redevelopment Schedule
June 3, 6:30 p.m. Joint City Council/Planning Commission Work
Session; Update on NW Quadrant Project
June 17, 7 p.m. Planning Commission: Review TIF and
Redevelopment Plan
June 24, 7 p.m. City Council: Public hearing on TIF Plan
Resolution on livable communities grant
August 19, 7 p.m. Planning Commission: Preliminary PUD review
August 26, 7 p.m. City Council: Preliminary PUD review
September 16, 7 p.m. Planning Commission: Public hearing on PUD
application
September 23 City Council: Final PUD and Developer
or October 14, 7 p.m. Agreement approvals
MAY-12-2003 11:37 WSB & ASSOCIATES 7635411700 P.03/03
TIMELINE TO PREPARE ANEAW FOR THE APACHE PLAZA
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
TASK PROPOSED TIMELINE
Data Collection/EAW Development May 27—July 1, 2003
City Staff/Council Review of EAW July 1 - 8, 2002
City Council Authorizes Submittal of EAW July 8, 2003
to Review Agencies
Submit EAW to EQB Monitor July 14, 2003
Publication in EQB Monitor July 21, 2003
EAW Comment Period July 21 —August 20,2003
Respond to Comments August 20—September 2,2003
City Staff/Council Reviews Responses to September 2 - % 2003
Comments
City Council Determines Need for EIS September 9, 2003
Decision Notice Published in EQB Monitor September 15 or 29,2003
TOTAL P.03
St. Anthony Village
Stonehouse Redevelopment
Preliminary Time Line
May 13 2003: Task Force recommendation on Fire Station/Public Works Facility
May 13, 2003: Update to City Council on possible redevelopment of Stonehouse site
June 24, 2003: Review and approval of selected option for redevelopment
June-Aug 2003: Finalize negotiations/terms of Redevelopment Agreement
June 2003: Submit application to Planning Commission
June 17, 2003: Planning Commission Preliminary Site Plan Review
June 24, 2003: City Council Preliminary Site Plan,Review
July 15, 2003: Planning.commission Final Site Plan Review
July 22, 2003: City Council Final Site Plan Review
July 22, 2003: Approval of Redevelopment Agreement
August 30, 2003: Property closing transaction
September 2003: Begin demolition/construction
February 2004: Project completed
COMMON MISTAKES IN LAND USE ORDINANCES
Based on a presentation to the 2002 Minnesota Association of City Attorneys
Educational Conference and Annual Meeting, February 8-9, 2002,
by Duke Addicks, Special Counsel, League of Minnesota Cities
(800) 925-1122. (651) 281-1221. addicks lnmc.org
In reviewing over 80 sets of land use ordinances over the past four years, I have
discovered that there are many common mistakes made by those who drafted
them. Also, there have been several recent changes in the Municipal Planning
Act (M. S. §§ 462.351 to 462.365) which conflict with and override provisions in
existing land use ordinances.
City attorneys should encourage every planning commission and zoning
administrator to review their existing ordinances to determine if they are
consistent with the following suggestions.
1. 60 Day Rule. Most city zoning ordinances have built in time limits which, if
followed, would result in a timeline which exceeds that permitted by law.
Timelines should either not be included in land use ordinances or changed to
conform to the 60 day rule. Also, the 60 day rule requires that the
approval/disapproval process_operate in a certain way. Please note that the
2003 legislature will be making changes to this "rule" and the suggestions
below should be compared with any changes the legislature may make.
• M. S. § 15.99 requires cities to issue or deny zoning permits, rezoning
petitions, and to approve or deny other land use related applications,
including applications for variances and conditional use permits, within 60
days after a complete application is received or"tFie application will be
deemed approved. An application is deemed completed unless within ten
days after the application is received written notice is given'the applicant
of what information is missing in order for the application to be complete.
• A city council must either approve or deny an.application within 60 days
after the completed application is filed, unless the Council determines
within that 60 day period that an additional 60 days is necessary and
informs the applicant in writing of its decision to and the reasons for
extending the first 60 day period by an additional 60 days.
• If a city denies the application it must state in writing at the time of the
denial the reasons for the denial. Written notice of the approval or denial
must be sent to the applicant within the 60 day period.
• The failure of a vote to approve an application is not deemed to be a
denial of the application. A motion to deny the application must be
adopted. See Manco of Fairmont v. Town Board of Rock Dell Township. ""
583 N. W. 2d 293 (Minn. App. 1998).
2. Time Frame for Plat Approval. Likewise many land use ordinances have
timelines inconsistent with the law concerning plat approval.
• Approval of an application for a preliminary plat must be given within 120
days unless both the city and the applicant agree to an extension.
• Final approval must be given 60 days after the applicant has met all
requirements and conditions. See M. S. § 462.358.
• Some city attorneys believe that the 60 day rule explained in note 1 may
apply to the approval of preliminary plats.
Referral to county engineer or state department of transportation. M. S. §
505.03, as amended by Laws 2000, Ch. 497, requires that at least 30
days prior to taking final action on a preliminary plat, the proposed
preliminary.plat must be presented to the Commissioner of Transportation
for review if the plat includes or borders on a trunk highway. Within five
days after receiving a preliminary plat that includes or borders on an
existing or proposed county road, the city must submit it to the county
engineer for review. The commissioner of transportation and the county
engineer must report to the city within 30 days with any comments and
recommendations they may have. Counties are required to adopt
guidelines for the review by the county engineer. No preliminary plat may
be approved by a city until these comments and recommendations are
received and considered. This requirement does not extend the 120 day
time under the planning act (or the 60 day rule, if it applies to preliminary
plat approval). Within ten days after approval of the preliminary plat, notice
must be sent to the commissioner or the county board explaining how the
comments and recommendations have been met.
3. Adoption and amendment of zoning ordinances. Ui�til recentlya 2/3 vote-of
the council was necessary to amend a zoning ordinance, under M. S. §
462.357, Subd. 2. Most zoning ordinances still contain this requirement. The
legislature has recently changed this requirement by Laws, 2001, Chapter
207, to a simple majority of the council, except that the adoption or
amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of
the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either
commercial or industrial requires a two-thirds majority vote of all members of
the city council. A council cannot by ordinance require a 2/3 vote to amend a
zoning ordinance, except in the circumstances mentioned above, or to
approve any application for a permit. The planning act clearly states that it
provides a "uniform procedure for adequately conducting and implementing
municipal planning". See M. S. 462.351'and Attorney.General Opinion 59a-32
to the city of Moorhead dated January 25, 2002.
4. Variances. Many zoning ordinances were drafted with standards for granting
variances which are less restrictive than those required by law. These
standards should be deleted and the law quoted. The statutory authorization
for variances is very restrictive and specific. For-variances to subdivision
regulations, see M. S. § 462.358, Subd. 6, which permits variances only
2
"where an unusual hardship on the land exists". For variances to zoning
regulations, see M. S. § 462.357, Subd. 6(1), which permits variances from
zoning ordinances only "in instances where their strict enforcement would
cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual
property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is
demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of
the ordinance. "Undue hardship, as used in connection with the granting of a
variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if
used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the
landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created,by the
landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character
of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue
hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the
ordinance. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate
access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be
granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06,
subdivision 2, when in harmony with the ordinance. The board of appeals
and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may not permit
as a variance any use that is not permitted under the ordinance. for property in
the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board, or
governing body, as the case may be, may permit as a variance the temporary
use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The board or governing
body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances
to insure compliance and to protect adjacent properties."
5. Conditional Uses. M. S. § 462.3595 provides the method for issuing
conditional use permits. Conditional uses are a cure for a problem with the
use of the land and the city cannot impose conditions that go beyond
resolving the problem. Conditional use restrictions must be reasonable and
imposed only after a hearing is held: The city cannot require that conditional
use permits be renewed after a specific time. Once a permit is granted, it
cannot be modified except with the agreement of the city and the landowner.
Conditional use permits cannot be for a specific period (use a licensing
procedure for occupations where an annual license and review is desired).- A
conditional use permit must be recorded by the city and the conditional use
runs with the land and applies even to subsequent purchasers of the land so
long as the conditions are being met. A conditional use permit can be
revoked after a hearing if there is not substantial compliance with the
conditions.
3
6. Special Use Permits. Many older land use ordinances and some older
League publications use the term "special use permit". There is no statutory
authority for a special use permit, and courts will likely assume that a special
use permit is in reality a conditional use permit and require that the processes
for issuing a conditional use permit contained in M. S. § 462.3595 be
followed. Wherever the term "special use" occurs it should be chanted in the
ordinance to "conditional use".
7. Nonconforming Uses. State Law, M. S. § 462.357, Subd. 1c (enacted by
Laws.2001, Chapter 174) now provides that "any nonconformity, including
the lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of the
adoption of-an-additional control under M. S. Chapter 462, maybe continued;
including through repair or maintenance, but if the nonconformity or
occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year, or any
nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of greater
than 50 percent of its market value, any subsequent use or occupancy of the
land or premises shall be a conforming use or occupancy." The new law does
provide that"a municipality may by ordinance impose upon nonconformities
reasonable regulations to prevent and abate nuisances and to protect the
public health, welfare, or safety." The new law also provides that it "does not
prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance that applies to adults-only
bookstores, adults-only theaters, or similar adults-only businesses, as defined
by ordinance." The ordinance should be changed to quote the above
language and remove any conflicting language or requirements..
8. Fee requirements. Most, if not all ordinances, now are inconsistent with many
rovision8 of the`state law concernin fees,'M.`S." 462:353-, Subd.-4;'as
amended by Laws 2001, Chapter 207.
• A city may prescribe fees sufficient to defray the costs incurred by it in
reviewing, investigating, and administering an application for an
amendment to its land use regulations (zoning and subdivision
regulations, official maps, etc.), an application for a permit, or some other
approval required under its land use regulations.
• These fees must be established by ordinance.
• These fees must be "fair, reasonable, and proportionate to the actual cost
of the service for which the fee is imposed.
• Cities are required to "adopt management and accounting procedures to
ensure that fees are maintained and used only for the purpose for which
they are collected".
• If a dispute arises over a specific fee imposed by a city, the amount of the
fee must be deposited and held in escrow, and the person aggrieved by
the fee may appeal to district court. An approved application would
proceed as if the fee had been paid, pending a decision by the court.
4
9. Manufactured Homes (Mobile Homes). Most ordinances conflict with state law
concerning the location of manufactured homes on residential lots.
• No city zoning regulation may prohibit manufactured homes built in
conformance with the manufactured home building code and which
comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuant to the state
law authorizing cities to zone. See M. S. § 327.31 to 327.35 and M. S.
462.357, Subdivision 1.
• A manufactured home is defined by law as a structure, transportable in
one or more sections, which in the traveling mode, is eight body feet or
more in width or 40 body feet or more in length, or, when erected on site,
is 320 or more square feet, and which is built on a permanent chassis and
designed to be used as a dwelling with or without a permanent foundation
when connected to the required utilities, and includes the plumbing,
heating, air conditioning, and electrical systems contained in it, and which
complies with the manufactured home building code established by M. S.
§ 327.31, Subd. 3. See M. S. § 327.31, Subdivisions 3 and 6.
• Manufactured or "mobile" homes built before July 1, 1972, that is before
there was a manufactured home building code, most likely do not comply
with the code. Thus these older mobile homes are not included in the
provisions of the zoning laws or manufactured home laws which prohibit
the zoning out of manufactured homes. They may be restricted or
prohibited within the city. Existing non-compliant mobile homes remain as
non-conforming uses.
• Other manufactured or"mobile" homes which do not meet the above
requirements, including the size requirements, are not included in the
definition of"manufactured homes" and thus are not included in the
provisions of the zoning laws or manufactured home laws which prohibit
the zoning out of manufactured homes. Existing homes which do not
comply with the manufactured home building code remain as a non-
conforming use.
• For purposes of city land use controls adopted before August 1, 1981, M.
S. § 327.36 re-defines the term "mobile homes" when it occurs in those
ordinances to include the term "manufactured homes" as defined in the
above law. Newer ordinances which define "mobile home" as structures
which do not comply with the manufactured home building code, can
restrict or prohibit the use of these "mobile homes" as residences within
the city. However, existing "mobile homes" remain as non-conforming
uses.
• A city can not require a manufactured home which was built under the
manufactured home code to comply with any other building, plumbing,
heating or electrical code or any construction standards. See M. S.
327.32, Subdivision 5.
5
• Cities can apply architectural and aesthetic requirements to manufactured
homes only if the same architectural and esthetic requirements also apply
to all other single family homes in the zoning district, not just to
manufactured homes. See M. S. 327.32, Subdivision 5.
10. Manufactured home parks. Likewise, many ordinances inconsistent with the
state law and rules concerning manufactured home parks.
• A manufactured home park is, by law, a conditional use in any zoning
district that allows the construction or placement of a building used or
'intended to be used by two or more families. M. S. § 462.357, Subd. 1 b.
• Cities can not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that has the
effect of altering the existing density, lot-size requirements, or „
manufactured home set back requirements in any manufactured home
park constructed before January 1, 1995, if the manufactured home park,
when constructed, complied with the then existing density, lot-size and
setback requirements, if any. See M. S. 462.357, Subdivisionsl a and 1 b.
• If a city has enacted an ordinance requiring that manufactured homes
within the city be secured by an anchoring system, a manufactured home
can not be installed in a manufactured home park unless the
manufactured home is secured by the anchoring system prescribed by the
manufactured home building code. See M. S. 327.32. Subdivision 6.
• Manufactured home parks are licensed by the State Department of Health
under M. S. §-327.15 and Minn. Rules parts 4630.0200 to 4630.2210.
Cities are prohibited from licensing manufactured home parks by M. S. §
327.26. Cities in their zoning ordinances should establish a conditional
use permit process including requirements not inconsistent with the state
rules. The City of=Faribaaat.established an ".Operation: SafeNobile-Homes" -
ordinance (Faribault Ord. 90-03) which establishes a time of sale
inspection process and is available from the League or that city.
11. Procedures which are inconsistent with the Municipal Planning Act. In
addition to the mistakes mentioned above, land use ordinances often contain
procedures that are inconsistent with state law. These may involve requiring a
super majority vote where state law contemplates a simple majority, but other
inconsistences dre common. State law provides "a uniform procedure for
adequately conducting and implementing municipal planning". M.S. 462.352. A
city can not in its charter or ordinances vary from these procedures, contained in
the Municipal Planning Act, M. S. 4632.352 through 462.365. See Attorney
General Opinion 59a-32 dated January 25, 2002, a copy of which can be found
at http://www.ag.state.mn.us/opinions/012502.htm
and Nordmarken v. City of Richfield, 641 N. W. 2d 343 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002), a
copy of which can be found at
http://www.Iawlibrary.state.mn.us/archive/ctappub/0204/c6011698.htm
6 .
NEW 2002 (9th edition) HANDBOOK FOR MINNESOTA CITIES IS NOW ON
THE LEAGUE'S WEB PAGE.
I have not cited many cases in these materials. For more information about this
topic, and for court cases on these points see Chapter 16 (Comprehensive
Planning and Land Use Regulation) of the New 2002 Searchable Handbook for
Minnesota Cities on the League's web page at www.lmnc.or
The New 2002 Searchable On-Line Handbook for Minnesota Cities contains links
to all federal and state laws and rules and regulations, all federal and recent state
court cases, recent attorney general opinions, web sites of various state and
federal departments and agencies, links to LMC and LMCIT publications, and
links to many additional sources of information. The On-Line Handbook will be
updated constantly as new laws and court decisions occur. A printed copy of the
On-Line Handbook is available from the League for$60 and will contain all new
laws, court cases, etc. through the end of January, 2002.
CODIFICATION AND LAND USE ORDINANCE LEGAL REVIEWS
For information on the League's Codification and Ordinance Review Service,
now providing codification services to over 110 Minnesota cities, contact Duke
Addicks at the League addicks@lmnc.org
The League's Codification and Ordinance Review Service also provides legal.
reviews of city's zoning, subdivision and other land use ordinances fora fee.
Contact Duke Addicks for details and a quotation.
Thee'2003- Editiovt" of the MinnesotaBa sic'Code will'contaih`ghorrtzoning"6hd''
subdivision ordinances suitable for adoption by smaller cities. I will send a copy
of either or both ordinances to any city which requests them.
This memo last revised 4 15 03.
7
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 1
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2
3 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
4
5 April 22, 2003
6
7
8 CALL TO ORDER.
9 Mayor Hodson called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
10
11 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
12 Mayor Hodson invited the Council and audience to join him in the Pledge of Allegiance.
13
14 ROLL CALL.
15 Present: Mayor Hodson; Councilmembers Horst, Sparks, Thuesen, and Faust.
16 Absent: None.
17 Also Present: City Manager Mike Mornson
18
19 CONSIDERATION, DISCUSSION, AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON ALL OF THE FOLLOWING
20 ITEMS:
21
22 I. APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 22, 2003 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA.
23 Motion by Councilmember Sparks to approve the City Council Meeting.Agenda of April 22,
24 2003.
25
26 Motion carried unanimously.
27
28 II. PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS.
29
30 A. Proclamation for Volunteer Recognition Week.
31 Councilmember Sparks read the Proclamation thanking the volunteers for their time and
32 service.
33
34 Motion by Councilmember Faust to approve the Volunteer Recognition Proclamation.
35
36 Motion carried unanimously.
37
38 B. Presentation of Certificates of Appreciation to Employee Service Award Recipients.
39 Mayor Hodson invited the following employees to come to the podium to receive their
40 respective Certificates of Appreciation: Richard Pfeiffer for 30 years, Robert Nehring for
41 15 years, Steve Nerheim for 20 years, Sandy Simon for 5 years, Mark Hermann for 15
42 years, Edward Markel for 5 years, Charles Quigley for 10 years, Kimberly Dulz for 15
43 years, Kevin Cardinal for 10 years, Jerome Jay for 15 years, Jeff Halet for 10 years, and
44 Diane Johnson for 20 years. Mayor Hodson thanked all of the employees for their years
45 of service.
46
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 8
III. COMMUNITY FORUM.
Mayor Hodson invited residents to come forward at this time and address the Council on items
that are not on the regular agenda.
James Weihoff explained that he was concerned about rumors that he had heard regarding the
use of revenue bonds and not general bonds for the Public Facilities. He asked the Council if
that was true.
Mayor Hodson stated that this was correct. Councilmember Sparks answered that that was the
recommendation of the task force.
Mr. Weihoff stated that he was a veteran and felt that his right to vote was being taken away.
Mr. Weihoff thanked the members of the task force for their efforts but stated that he felt their
efforts were in vain. Mr. Weihoff explained that he felt the amount of equipment and type of
facility that was needed must be determined by an assessment of the needs. Mr. Weihoff
expressed that he felt the proposed fire barn was too plush for the 8,012 population of St.
Anthony.
Mr. Weihoff proceeded to provide through several comparisons between St. Anthony, New
Brighton, Arden Hills and Mounds View. He stated that per capita,New Brighton's cost for fire
and maintenance is less than half of St. Anthony's. Mr. Weihoff stated that he feels St. Anthony
is high on the cost for police and fire for the size of the community. He described Golden
Valley's arrangement with businesses that would allow employees to volunteer and respond to
fires and reported that the arrangement was working well. Mr. Weihoff asked for any questions.
Mayor Hodson thanked Mr. Weihoff.
Mr. Weihoff added that for government expenditures, the liquor business used to pay for that
part of the expenses. He stated that this cost for St. Anthony is higher than other communities.
Mr. Weihoff also stated that he was opposed to employees working more than eight hour days.
Mayor Hodson asked if there were any other residents who wanted to come forward. Hearing
none, Mayor Hodson moved forward with the agenda.
IV. CONSENT AGENDA.
A. Approve March 11, 2003 Council meeting minutes.
Approve April 8, 2003 Council meeting minutes.
B. Consider licenses and permits.
C. Consider payment of claims.
D. Approval of Memorandum of Understanding with ISD #282 for conduct of 2003 Local
Elections.
E. Resolution 03-033, re: Approval of Amendment to LOGIS Health Care Plan.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 3
Councilmember Faust moved to remove the March 11, 2003 Council meeting minutes from the
Consent Agenda.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Councilmember Thuesen to approve the Consent Agenda less the March 11, 2.003
Council meeting minutes.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Councilmember Sparks to approve the March 11, 2003 Council meeting minutes.
Motion carried with Horst and Faust abstaining from the vote.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS.
A. Discussion of City's 2004 Proposed Budget.
Mayor Hodson opened the public hearing at 7:25 p.m.
Mr. Morrison stated that typically they have not held a public hearing on the budget except to
respond to public reaction and that it is up to the Mayor on how to handle the public hearing.
Councilmember Faust stated that this is the first opportunity with regard to the budget and they
are just starting. He explained that the Council is looking for comments.
Hearing none, Mayor Hodson closed the public hearing at 7:27 p.m.
VI. GENERAL POLICY BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL.
A. Resolution 03-031 re: Authorizing Application for the Tax Base Revitalization Account.
Mr. Morrison explained that Resolution 03-031 is an application for an environmental grant from
the Metropolitan Council for asbestos and demolition removal regarding the Northwest
Quadrant. Mr. Morrison stated that they are asking for$300,000 to $500,000 and there is
funding for this project. Mr. Morrison explained that in June they will be going back for another
grant called a Livable Community Grant.
Motion by Councilmember Sparks to approve Resolution 03-031, re: Authorizing Application
for the Tax Base Revitalization Account.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. Resolution 03-032 re: Call for public hearing on modification for Redevelopment
Project Area No 3 and the establishment of a Tax Increment Financinp,District No. 3 - 5
and for the awarding of business subsidies.
Mr. Morrison stated that this resolution calls for a public hearing to establish a tax increment
financing district for the Northwest Quadrant and that a plan will be recommended at that
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 8
hearing and adoption of the plan may be done prior to June 301h to capture all the increments.
Mr. Mornson explained that this is just one step in the process.
Motion by Councilmember Faust to approve Resolution 03-032, re: Calling for public hearing on
modification for Redevelopment Project Area No. 3. and the establishment of a Tax Increment
Financing District No. 3 - 5 and for the awarding of business subsidies.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Hodson commented that it is critical to keep moving forward regarding the
redevelopment of Apache Plaza.
VII. REPORTS FROM COMMISSIONS AND STAFF.
A. Fire Department 2002 Annual Report and discuss fire pumper bids. Joel Hewitt, Fire
Chief, will be present.
Mayor Hodson introduced Fire Chief Joel Hewitt.
Chief Hewitt showed various slides of the fire department and explained in detail: customer
service belief, customer service feedback, the apparatus that the fire department owns, and he
explained how the rating of 5 helps homeowners and businesses to keep their insurance rates
down.
Mayor Hodson asked for clarification on the insurance rating system.
Chief Hewitt stated that 10 is the worst and 1 is the best and for a homeowner, if the rating is 7,
8, 9 or 10 the homeowner rates go up. For commercial buildings and multifamily, the insurance
will be improved 2— 11%by a lower rating. The best ratings in the State are town class 3.
Mayor Hodson commented that the Council should pay attention to this because over a period of
time this could make a difference for the City.
Councilmember Sparks asked for further clarification. Chief Hewitt explained that to maintain a
rating of 5 they need to maintain three pumpers because the first truck carries 500 gallons of
water, the second pumper hooks up to a fire hydrant, and the third would support a sprinkler
system.
Chief Hewitt compared in detail the 2001 and 2002 Fire Department response activities
including: property saved, fire loss, response time and significant incidents. Chief Hewitt
explained how the fire department trains, also which drills and mandates are followed. Chief
Hewitt listed the 2002 capital improvements including radios used by the whole county and
explained they had no choice in doing this. Chief Hewitt listed the remaining capital
improvements.
Chief Hewitt showed slides to explain which community activities the Fire Department is
involved with. Chief Hewitt discussed the 2004 challenges and explained the F.E.M.A. grants
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 9
that have been applied for.
Chief Hewitt reviewed the Housing Code Enforcement issues that were addressed by the Fire
Department during the year. Chief Hewitt thanked the twenty people who have served on the
task force and others. He discussed the budget and the fire department value, stating that the
average residential property pays $12.32 per month for fire service. Chief Hewitt asked for any
questions.
Mayor Hodson thanked Chief Hewitt and asked for any comments or questions.
Mr. Morrison stated that the Fire Department is due for a new pumper and that the Fire Chief has
a presentation regarding this. Because the bid date will expire at the end of this month, they are
asking for a vote on this tonight:
Chief Hewitt explained that the 1975 pumper needs to be replaced because the estimate to repair
that pumper is over$100,000. There was a committee that researched the issue and checked into
many demonstrators. Chief Hewitt reviewed the six bids that were received and explained that
the General Safety bid was the lowest received. The committee recommended the purchase of
this General Safety demonstrator. Chief Hewitt listed in detail what the rig included and why it
would meet the needs of the Fire Department.
Councilmember Horst asked about the mileage on the rig. Jay Olson commented that it was like
new.
Councilmember Sparks asked if the $246,916 bid included the $30,000 worth of modifications.
Mr. Morrison stated that the $246,916 included the $30,000 worth of modifications.
Councilmember Horst acknowledged that this pumper was less than the last one that was
purchased.
Councilmember Faust stated that this is something that has been a part of the five year capital
improvement plan and asked about the value of the 1975 rig. Chief Hewitt stated that the last
used rig sold for$4,000, so the value is not much.
Councilmember Thuesen thanked the Fire Chief for giving the details of the ratings for insurance
and explaining why three pumper trucks are needed to maintain that rating.
Motion by,Councilmember Thuesen to approve Resolution 03-034, Re: Awarding a bid for a
fire motor pumping apparatus to General Safety for$246,916.
Motion carried unanimously.
B. Police Department 2002 Annual ReportDick Engstrom Chief of Police, will be present.
Mayor Hodson introduced Chief Engstrom.
Police Chief Engstrom presented the 2002 Annual Report for the Police Department,
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 8
highlighting part one crimes, going back from 1998 through 2002. Chief Engstrom mentioned
that because of an increase in the 0— 19 year olds, crimes are expected to go up also. Chief
Engstrom gave specific totals for each type of crime during 2002, including the fact that
burglaries have gone up.
Chief Engstrom listed the totals for the part two crimes, which include all crimes that are not part
one or index crimes. Chief Engstrom stated that clearance rates for 2002 were 64%.
Mayor Hodson asked for clarification of clearance rates. Chief.Engstrom stated that it related to
crimes that had been solved.
Chief Engstrom then discussed other crimes of interest, metro comparisons, the patrol statistics,
investigations, significant cases including a bomb threat at the high school and others.
Chief Engstrom noted that many changes have been,made since 9/11, including updates to
emergency plans, various seminars, work with securing the water supply and other changes.
Chief Engstrom stated that on the flip side there has been a lot of community involvement and
listed various public education programs including the DARE program and National Night Out.
Chief Engstrom mentioned that volunteers have been a significant presence and that the police
reserve in 2002 had 1,629 squad hours, 175 ride along hours, and 351 event hours.
Chief Engstrom listed the 2002 accomplishments and discussed the work plan.for 2003. Chief
Engstom asked for questions.
Councilmember Sparks asked for explanation of youth population connection to crime rates.
Chief Engstrom explained that with the youth population going up there is an expectation of
youth committed crimes going up.
Councilmember Sparks mentioned that St. Anthony has a declining population of youth. Chief
Engstrom stated that surrounding communities could have an impact on the community and that
he is not attributing the rise in crime to youth in the St. Anthony community.
Councilmember Sparked requested that the Police Chief discuss block parties. Chief Engstrom
expressed a desire to encourage more block parties because they were important to.public safety
and accounted for many tips by residents that helped with the 64% clearance rate.
Councilmember Faust related the National Night Out to community policing. Chief Engstrom
agreed and stated that there was no such thing as a bad call.
Mayor Hodson asked if it is all right for residents to report suspicious activity by calling 911.
Chief Engstrom answered in the affirmative.
Mayor Hodson thanked Chief Engstrom.
VIII. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER AND COUNCILMEMBERS.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 9
Mr. Morrison reported that phase one of the Stonehouse redevelopment has been done at no cost
to the City because a grant was received for$5,000 through the PCA. Also a second grant has
been applied for and it looks like they may possibly be getting another grant. Mr. Morrison
stated that appraisals have been ordered for the Tires Plus location.
Mr. Mornson also stated that there are twelve meetings during the next six weeks including a
work session with Ehler's on public facilities financing and also a joint meeting with the school
board and St. Anthony Boulevard neighborhood next week. The schedule also includes seven
construction projects to be finished up this year.
Mayor Hodson asked for further comments and requested that Councilmember Faust give his
update first.
Councilmember Faust stated that April 9`h was City Day at the Capitol and was attended by the
Mayor, the City Manager and himself. He stated that there were approximately 250 council
people representing cities from across the State and they were able to share their concerns with
the Legislature.
Councilmember Faust commented that on April 12`h the Council attended the Culvers kick off
and on April 14th the Mayor, Sue Hall and he attended the Humphrey Institute where the Blue
Ribbon Panel was started with some very prominent individuals.
Councilmember Faust reported that this panel is funded by Hennepin County to do some cutting-
edge design for the future for the Northwest Quadrant and that it may be a blue print that can be
used by the rest of the country to future-proof an area.
Councilmember Faust stated that April 16`h was the annual Chamber of Commerce dinner. Dave
Evans was awarded the Villager of the Year and the Business of the Year recipient was Dr. Todd
Hanson.
Councilmember Faust reported that there will be a proclamation on May 12`h at 7:00 p.m. to
welcome the Sister City visitors and tomorrow is Job Shadow Day, which is a partnership
between the Chamber of Commerce and the schools where the kids are able to job shadow adults
in different career fields.
Councilmember Thuesen reported that at the April 15t1 Planning Commission meeting the
secondhand goods and pawn shop ordinances were discussed and are ready to go.
Councilmember Thuesen noted that a public hearing was held with no comment. The next step
will be for the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing in May regarding the zoning
amendment to the ordinances and recommending a fee structure.
Councilmember Thuesen stated that there will also be a public hearing in May regarding the
Adult Day Care amendment, recommendations for a conditional use permit in commercial
zones and the entire package will be presented at the May 27`h Council meeting.
Councilmember Sparks reported that the Parks Commission toured Silver Point Park to see the
placement of the building and that they are planning to tour Central Park.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 8
Councilmember Sparks stated that Village Fest is on track for August 2"d and also she has been
working with the school board toward getting funds for youth issues.
Councilmember Sparks stated that on June 10`' she will be attending Growing Smart in
Minnesota.
Councilmember Horst had no report.
Mayor Hodson went into further detail about the Blue Ribbon Panel and what the potential will
be for the City of St. Anthony.
Mr. Mornson stated that a grant came from Hennepin County for$12,000 to pay for the Blue
Ribbon Panel.
Mayor Hodson reported that it was the contacts from within the community that gave them the
access to the people at high levels for the Blue Ribbon Panel.
Mayor Hodson stated that he would have three kids job shadowing him tomorrow. Mayor
Hodson encouraged everyone to attend the May'1st State of the City and Volunteer Appreciation
Ice Cream Social.
Mayor Hodson reported that the Stonehouse redevelopment could add $65,000 to $70,000 to the
tax payrolls; and in addition, development for the City includes Autumn Woods, which will have
16—30 new units, Walgreens is complete and there is a new fitness center and coffee shop at the
St. Anthony Shopping Center.
Councilmember Faust asked the Mayor to discuss Clean Up Day.
Mayor Hodson reported that on Saturday, May 3`d there will be a city-wide Clean Up Day. The
Mayor also added that some elderly people need assistance to haul some things to the site.
Mayor Hodson volunteered his truck and asked for volunteers to help with the project.
IX. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.
None.
X. MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATIONAL DOCUMENTS.
None.
XI. ADJOURNMENT.
Motion by Mayor Hodson to adjourn the meeting at 8:58 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
Sandra A. Miller
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 22, 2003
Page 9
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Mayor